Windows Forum

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Win 2K license problem

0 helpful
2 replies

by frank noe

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.
I have installed a small network with only 8 PC's connected plus a Win 2k server and used 10 user licenses package. First I set up the licensing as a per server and then found that I was exceeding the limit in order to find out where the extra licenses were going I changed the licensing to per seat. I have multiply mapped dives to the server on all of the workstation that are Win2k Pro (btw) and I have 1 printer that I am sharing off of the server via TCP/IP port to a print server but that onlyequals 9 licenses. I have printer directly connected to each of the workstation and have those are shared also ( I don't think this is the problem but who knows at this point). When I look at the license manager I see the name of the workstation andthe name of the user for each workstation but one has a "$" after it's name I suppose this is because the workstation and the use have the same name. This is the fact for most of the PC's. I show that I am using anywhere from 16 to 18 licenses. My question is why are both the user and the workstation both using up licenses or am I doing something wrong? I thought that if you have 8 PC's then 10 licenses should be enough. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

2 replies

by umbral-echo

License Manager in a Per Seat environment assumes that you will have one user per computer and this is not true in your case. However, if you have only 8 machines you have more than enough Client Access Licenses. Here is why it is using so many more.

You have more than one user logging on to those machines. They are tracked individually regardless of where they log on so each Active Directory account you have used to connect to the server (This is the only type of connection you need to license) will show up as a separate seat. The user accounts should be familiar. Each system account should have a $ sign after the name (Often computer accounts).

To correct this you need to configure "License Groups" in License Manager. Open the Licensing program in the "Administrative Tools" from the Start Menu. From the "Options" menu choose Advanced-New License Group. In the dialog box just combine all the users who use the same computer, and all the sytem accounts from the same computer in the list. This will correct your problem. Each license group requires a single CAL.

by shanghai sam

I did try using licensing groups before posting this question. I am looking for a way to combine a number of computers into one license group, not a group for each PC. (i.e.) All of the PC's that are on the first floor with all the users that will be working on the first floor and configuring the license group with the total amount of license's needed to equal the total amount of PC's. Lets say I have 6 PC's on the first floor with 10 employees and then I have 2 PC's on the second floor with 4 employees. I want to configure 2 license groups (first-floor) and (second-floor), then I want to assign 1st floor with the user names of the 10 employees and 8 PC's along with any system accounts associated with any of the PC's and give that group 8 licenses and respectively do the same for the 2nd floor except plug the appropriate amount of users and PC's and system accounts then assigning that group 2 licenses. This solution did not work and your proposed solution would have me make a separategroup for each PC, that to seems like allot of work especial if the number of PC's where in the hundreds and not just the 10's of workstations. There has to be a better and easier way to work this out. Unless I'm not understand what you are trying to explain to me, if that be the case I would appreciate it you could write out an example of what you mean in a fashion similar to the above. Thanks for taking the time to give me a suggestion and if you get a chance any further thoughts on this situation would be greatly appreciated.

This discussion is closed to new replies.