Another Silly User CAL Question

Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around the SBS
2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No problem
there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL, in
particular the User CAL.

I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and blood"
person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the system
owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels. These
accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
different network or application accesse concepts and security models. I
have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account JohnB
that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account JohnC
that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each one to
test to see how those privileges affect the user access.

So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model? Won't SBS
assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick up in
the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses away from
my "flesh and blood" users?

And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current CAL
volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my test
efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
consumed by my Administrator login).

And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
"real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
non-available licenses?

Makes my hair hurt...

I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network - 9
worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one installed
software package that has created its own "service" account, and I typically
have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various tasks
so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
particular job at hand.

Can someone help me understand?

Thanks.

Lets see if I can help

Firstly, service accounts will not use up a CAL, only items authenticating
'logging onto network' will.

Set server up and add your 3 users... no CALS are used yet.

Logon to one pc (username1) and a CAL is used up. Your KEY is to keep a
paper based record. The question is, is this a device or user CAL? If you
logon same pc with one of your other usernames then SBS will take this as a
device CAL and still only show 1 license.

If one of your previously logged in user names (say user1) logs into another
pc (pc2) then that username has become a USER cal and now 2 licenses used.
If your 3rd username logged onto original first pc (pc1) you will still have
2 CALS used as the first pc has been nominated as a device CAL

Your paperbased record will record user1 as User CAL and original pc is a
Device CAL.... following so far... ;-)

If Username2 logged in remotely then username2 becomes a USER CAL, now you
have used 3 licenses.

1 License.. username1 USER CAL
2 Licenses.. PC1 DEVICE CAL
3 Licenses.. username2 USER CAL

If a member of staff joined, now 4 users and logged into PC1 you will still
have only used 3 licenses as PC1 is a device CAL. If this new user logged
onto any pc AFTER logging into PC1 then new user becomes a USER CAL so you
now have 3 user cals and a device cal.

If the new user logged into a different PC without going near pc1 then
another license will be used BUT is it a device or user cal ? This is where
your paper based record comes into play. If new user was say a secretary and
never going to move from pc and not dial in then technically this could be
classed as a device cal allowing other users able to login without incurring
another license but those users would not be allowed to login to another pc
as this user would then become a USER CAL.

Microsoft is very clever... ;-)

Licenses are purchased in blocks of 5 min.

I have sites where a block of five purchased as DEVICE CALS but only 3
devices used ( PCs) leaving two spare. So for arguements sake lets say just
have this 5 licenses on server (remember they are recorded on PAPER as
DEVICE CALS) However new employee starts and will dial in so need a USER
CAL. I cant use the DEVICE CAL so have to purchase 5 USER CALS. This is
where your paper based record is important ( to be compliant) because the
SBS would allow new user to login as there are two spare licenses.

Phew... this confused me writing it down... so much easier to speak
it........... Hope it helps.








"gbchriste" <> wrote in message
news:AFEF1107-A4FC-483A-9897-...
> Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around the
> SBS
> 2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No problem
> there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL, in
> particular the User CAL.
>
> I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and
> blood"
> person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the
> system
> owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels. These
> accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
> different network or application accesse concepts and security models. I
> have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account
> JohnB
> that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account
> JohnC
> that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each one
> to
> test to see how those privileges affect the user access.
>
> So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model? Won't SBS
> assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
> account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick up
> in
> the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses away
> from
> my "flesh and blood" users?
>
> And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current CAL
> volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my
> test
> efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
> consumed by my Administrator login).
>
> And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
> "real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
> enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
> non-available licenses?
>
> Makes my hair hurt...
>
> I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network - 9
> worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one installed
> software package that has created its own "service" account, and I
> typically
> have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various
> tasks
> so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
> particular job at hand.
>
> Can someone help me understand?
>
> Thanks.

Hi gb,

Inline:

--
Les Connor [SBS MVP]


"gbchriste" <> wrote in message
news:AFEF1107-A4FC-483A-9897-...
> Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around the
> SBS
> 2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No problem
> there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL, in
> particular the User CAL.
>
> I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and
> blood"
> person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the
> system
> owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels. These
> accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
> different network or application accesse concepts and security models. I
> have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account
> JohnB
> that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account
> JohnC
> that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each one
> to
> test to see how those privileges affect the user access.
>
> So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model?

One flesh and blood user, one user CAL ;-).

Won't SBS
> assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
> account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick up
> in
> the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses away
> from
> my "flesh and blood" users?

SBS doesn't assign CALs, the 'responsible person' (business owner, sys
admin, whomever) assigns them, and is responsible for tracking them, and
making sure the users and/or devices are licenced.

As in, "you can drive a car with or without a drivers licence". The choice,
and responsibility, remains with the driver.

>
> And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current CAL
> volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my
> test
> efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
> consumed by my Administrator login).

As before, the three user "accounts" are used by one flesh and blood person,
therefore only one CAL needs to be assigned.

>
> And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
> "real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
> enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
> non-available licenses?

SBS makes an attempt to detect when you're approching a limit. You'll see a
warning on the console, and an event will be logged. But, it's hard for the
SBS to know, only the sysadmin knows and that's why he/she is responsible.

>
> Makes my hair hurt...
>
> I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network - 9
> worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one installed
> software package that has created its own "service" account, and I
> typically
> have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various
> tasks
> so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
> particular job at hand.
>
> Can someone help me understand?
>
> Thanks.

But doesn't SBS at some point start denying logins due to excess license
usage? Does that occur only if the number of currently logged in users
exceeds the installed license count?

"Les Connor [SBS MVP]" wrote:

> Hi gb,
>
> Inline:
>
> --
> Les Connor [SBS MVP]
>
>
> "gbchriste" <> wrote in message
> news:AFEF1107-A4FC-483A-9897-...
> > Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around the
> > SBS
> > 2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No problem
> > there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL, in
> > particular the User CAL.
> >
> > I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and
> > blood"
> > person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the
> > system
> > owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels. These
> > accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
> > different network or application accesse concepts and security models. I
> > have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account
> > JohnB
> > that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account
> > JohnC
> > that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each one
> > to
> > test to see how those privileges affect the user access.
> >
> > So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model?
>
> One flesh and blood user, one user CAL ;-).
>
> Won't SBS
> > assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
> > account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick up
> > in
> > the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses away
> > from
> > my "flesh and blood" users?
>
> SBS doesn't assign CALs, the 'responsible person' (business owner, sys
> admin, whomever) assigns them, and is responsible for tracking them, and
> making sure the users and/or devices are licenced.
>
> As in, "you can drive a car with or without a drivers licence". The choice,
> and responsibility, remains with the driver.
>
> >
> > And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current CAL
> > volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my
> > test
> > efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
> > consumed by my Administrator login).
>
> As before, the three user "accounts" are used by one flesh and blood person,
> therefore only one CAL needs to be assigned.
>
> >
> > And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
> > "real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
> > enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
> > non-available licenses?
>
> SBS makes an attempt to detect when you're approching a limit. You'll see a
> warning on the console, and an event will be logged. But, it's hard for the
> SBS to know, only the sysadmin knows and that's why he/she is responsible.
>
> >
> > Makes my hair hurt...
> >
> > I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network - 9
> > worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one installed
> > software package that has created its own "service" account, and I
> > typically
> > have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various
> > tasks
> > so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
> > particular job at hand.
> >
> > Can someone help me understand?
> >
> > Thanks.
>

Actually that just confuses the issue even more. Your explanation would seem
to suggest that it is irrelevant what type of license pack you buy (user vs
device) since SBS is going to decide on its own what type of license is being
used.

By your logic, I could setup SBS with 5 user CALS, but have 25 different
people use the system on 5 PCs, as long as I had them in groups of 5, with
each group limited to using the same PC - which is of course a device
licensing model, not a user licenseing model. If so, why bother with the
distinction of user vs device CAL?

"Teneo" wrote:

> Lets see if I can help
>
> Firstly, service accounts will not use up a CAL, only items authenticating
> 'logging onto network' will.
>
> Set server up and add your 3 users... no CALS are used yet.
>
> Logon to one pc (username1) and a CAL is used up. Your KEY is to keep a
> paper based record. The question is, is this a device or user CAL? If you
> logon same pc with one of your other usernames then SBS will take this as a
> device CAL and still only show 1 license.
>
> If one of your previously logged in user names (say user1) logs into another
> pc (pc2) then that username has become a USER cal and now 2 licenses used.
> If your 3rd username logged onto original first pc (pc1) you will still have
> 2 CALS used as the first pc has been nominated as a device CAL
>
> Your paperbased record will record user1 as User CAL and original pc is a
> Device CAL.... following so far... ;-)
>
> If Username2 logged in remotely then username2 becomes a USER CAL, now you
> have used 3 licenses.
>
> 1 License.. username1 USER CAL
> 2 Licenses.. PC1 DEVICE CAL
> 3 Licenses.. username2 USER CAL
>
> If a member of staff joined, now 4 users and logged into PC1 you will still
> have only used 3 licenses as PC1 is a device CAL. If this new user logged
> onto any pc AFTER logging into PC1 then new user becomes a USER CAL so you
> now have 3 user cals and a device cal.
>
> If the new user logged into a different PC without going near pc1 then
> another license will be used BUT is it a device or user cal ? This is where
> your paper based record comes into play. If new user was say a secretary and
> never going to move from pc and not dial in then technically this could be
> classed as a device cal allowing other users able to login without incurring
> another license but those users would not be allowed to login to another pc
> as this user would then become a USER CAL.
>
> Microsoft is very clever... ;-)
>
> Licenses are purchased in blocks of 5 min.
>
> I have sites where a block of five purchased as DEVICE CALS but only 3
> devices used ( PCs) leaving two spare. So for arguements sake lets say just
> have this 5 licenses on server (remember they are recorded on PAPER as
> DEVICE CALS) However new employee starts and will dial in so need a USER
> CAL. I cant use the DEVICE CAL so have to purchase 5 USER CALS. This is
> where your paper based record is important ( to be compliant) because the
> SBS would allow new user to login as there are two spare licenses.
>
> Phew... this confused me writing it down... so much easier to speak
> it........... Hope it helps.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "gbchriste" <> wrote in message
> news:AFEF1107-A4FC-483A-9897-...
> > Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around the
> > SBS
> > 2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No problem
> > there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL, in
> > particular the User CAL.
> >
> > I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and
> > blood"
> > person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the
> > system
> > owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels. These
> > accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
> > different network or application accesse concepts and security models. I
> > have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account
> > JohnB
> > that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account
> > JohnC
> > that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each one
> > to
> > test to see how those privileges affect the user access.
> >
> > So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model? Won't SBS
> > assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
> > account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick up
> > in
> > the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses away
> > from
> > my "flesh and blood" users?
> >
> > And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current CAL
> > volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my
> > test
> > efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
> > consumed by my Administrator login).
> >
> > And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
> > "real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
> > enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
> > non-available licenses?
> >
> > Makes my hair hurt...
> >
> > I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network - 9
> > worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one installed
> > software package that has created its own "service" account, and I
> > typically
> > have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various
> > tasks
> > so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
> > particular job at hand.
> >
> > Can someone help me understand?
> >
> > Thanks.
>
>
>

gbchriste wrote:

>Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around the
>SBS
>2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No problem
>there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL, in
>particular the User CAL.

SBS is not able to accurately track CAL *allocation*, never mind usage.


>I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and
>blood"
>person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the system
>owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels. These
>accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
>different network or application accesse concepts and security models. I
>have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account
>JohnB
>that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account
>JohnC
>that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each one to
>test to see how those privileges affect the user access.
>
>So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model? Won't SBS
>assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
>account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick up in
>the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses away
>from
>my "flesh and blood" users?

Technically, in a scenario where you're performing administrative tasks
(even if that means using a lesser privileged account), no CAL whatsoever.

Of course, if you have regular duties, you (as a "bag o'meat") have a User
CAL anyway.

SBS will take a wild stab at the number of CALs in use. And it really is a
wild stab. The maximum usage figure that SBS shows is simply its highest
stab since the last reboot.

>And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current CAL
>volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my test
>efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
>consumed by my Administrator login).

Your SBS console shows "10". That's it. No fireworks, no party, no party
girl[1] popping out of a cake.

Administrators do not consume a CAL (whle they are _exclusively_
administering).

>And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
>"real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
>enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
>non-available licenses?

There is simply no way for SBS to be able to correctly do this. It has to
be on trust. Other MS server products don't even bother asking for product
keys for CAL additions.


>Makes my hair hurt...
>
>I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network - 9
>worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one installed
>software package that has created its own "service" account, and I
>typically
>have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various
>tasks
>so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
>particular job at hand.
>
>Can someone help me understand?

The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
sufficient CALs, you're golden.

--
Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
---------------------------------------
MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.

[1] or party guy, if that's what floats your boat.

I've not tried to push the licensing into an obvious out-of-compliance
scenario.

The key point to remember is that the SBS itself won't/can't monitor and
enforce licensing the way you're expecting it to. It is your responsibility.

The Post-it note analogy might work ...

If you have a total of 5 user CALs and 5 Device CALs, then take 10 post-it
notes and write USER on 5, and DEVICE on 5.

For the users that log onto the SBS via more than one device (for example -
desktop at work, laptop, and PDA), hand them a USER CAL. It's theirs to
keep, it's assigned to that person. Now, it doesn't matter what device they
use to log on, nor how many concurrent logons they may have, they are using
a single user CAL, that's all they need, and you have 4 CALs left. If the
person leaves the company, re-assign the CAL to someone else.

Where you have a device, such as a workstation that's shared by more than
one person - take one of the Post-it notes marked DEVICE, and stick it to
the machine. It stays there, assigned to that device. Now, *any* person,
whether they have a user CAL or not, may use the device to connect to the
SBS. You now have 4 DEVICE CALs remaining.

For record keeping purposes, and to be able to demonstrate license
compliance - keep track of these assignments. When you're out of Post-it
Notes, your CALs are all assigned. If you add computers that will be used by
persons not possessing a User CAL, or if you add persons who will be using
devices not covered by Device CALs, then purchase more.

MS has always suggested that you use only one type of CAL, for simplicity
sake. But it's not a requirement, you can mix CAL types to your best
advantage.



--
Les Connor [SBS MVP]


"gbchriste" <> wrote in message
news:B49D6C3D-F9E9-41AC-AA5F-...
> But doesn't SBS at some point start denying logins due to excess license
> usage? Does that occur only if the number of currently logged in users
> exceeds the installed license count?
>
> "Les Connor [SBS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Hi gb,
>>
>> Inline:
>>
>> --
>> Les Connor [SBS MVP]
>>
>>
>> "gbchriste" <> wrote in message
>> news:AFEF1107-A4FC-483A-9897-...
>> > Like most people, I have a hard time wrapping my entire brain around
>> > the
>> > SBS
>> > 2003 CAL model. I understand the basic User vs Device model. No
>> > problem
>> > there. What I don't get is how SBS tracks/evaluates/enforces the CAL,
>> > in
>> > particular the User CAL.
>> >
>> > I've read in several places that the User CAL is tied to a "flesh and
>> > blood"
>> > person, not to a particular AD logon account. For example, I as the
>> > system
>> > owner might create 3 AD accounts with different privilege levels.
>> > These
>> > accounts are not used by my network users but only by me to test out
>> > different network or application accesse concepts and security models.
>> > I
>> > have user account JohnA that is put in a super user group, user account
>> > JohnB
>> > that is in a group with slightly elevated privileges, and user account
>> > JohnC
>> > that has severly restricted privileges. I alternately logon as each
>> > one
>> > to
>> > test to see how those privileges affect the user access.
>> >
>> > So my question is, how many CALS are consumed by that model?
>>
>> One flesh and blood user, one user CAL ;-).
>>
>> Won't SBS
>> > assign a CAL to each account the first time I logon with each of those
>> > account usernames - i.e. won't I see the Max Licenses Used count tick
>> > up
>> > in
>> > the License manager? And if so, aren't I taking available licenses
>> > away
>> > from
>> > my "flesh and blood" users?
>>
>> SBS doesn't assign CALs, the 'responsible person' (business owner, sys
>> admin, whomever) assigns them, and is responsible for tracking them, and
>> making sure the users and/or devices are licenced.
>>
>> As in, "you can drive a car with or without a drivers licence". The
>> choice,
>> and responsibility, remains with the driver.
>>
>> >
>> > And what happens when that Max Licenses Used count hits 10 (my current
>> > CAL
>> > volume)? I may only have 8 "real" people on the network but aren't my
>> > test
>> > efforts consuming 3 CALS (not to mention the one that has already been
>> > consumed by my Administrator login).
>>
>> As before, the three user "accounts" are used by one flesh and blood
>> person,
>> therefore only one CAL needs to be assigned.
>>
>> >
>> > And if it doesn't work that way - if SBS "trusts" me not to allow more
>> > "real" people to login that I have CALs for, how is the license model
>> > enforced? At what point do people start getting denied access due to
>> > non-available licenses?
>>
>> SBS makes an attempt to detect when you're approching a limit. You'll
>> see a
>> warning on the console, and an event will be logged. But, it's hard for
>> the
>> SBS to know, only the sysadmin knows and that's why he/she is
>> responsible.
>>
>> >
>> > Makes my hair hurt...
>> >
>> > I ask because I have exactly 10 "flesh and blood" users on my network -
>> > 9
>> > worker bees and me, the lowly admin. But I've already seen one
>> > installed
>> > software package that has created its own "service" account, and I
>> > typically
>> > have a couple of additional accounts that I create and use for various
>> > tasks
>> > so that I don't log in with more privileges than I need to perform the
>> > particular job at hand.
>> >
>> > Can someone help me understand?
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>>

Steve Foster [SBS MVP] wrote:

>The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
>sufficient CALs, you're golden.

Slight rephrase:

>The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
>sufficient (working on the people/devices model we've been talking about)
>CALs, you're golden.


--
Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
---------------------------------------
MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.

Thanks folks. What you're saying all makes perfect sense and conforms to the
way I envison SBS working in my environment. I'm just always befuddled by
postings I see from people who say their SBS is denying a user log in because
the license count has been exceeded. If what all of you are saying is
correct, how do you explain that SBS behavior?

"Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" wrote:

> Steve Foster [SBS MVP] wrote:
>
> >The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
> >sufficient CALs, you're golden.
>
> Slight rephrase:
>
> >The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
> >sufficient (working on the people/devices model we've been talking about)
> >CALs, you're golden.
>
>
> --
> Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
> ---------------------------------------
> MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.
>

I'm not sure that people are saying logons *are* denied because of
licensing, I think they're asking the question as in "could that be the
reason I can't log in?".

Generally, if the number of installed CALs are in the ballpark, the answer
is "no, that's not the reason".

If you're trying to run 50 users on 5 CALs, then you don't need to bother
asking the question - fix that first ;-).

--
Les Connor [SBS MVP]


"gbchriste" <> wrote in message
news:FD086D6C-BC00-47B3-832F-...
> Thanks folks. What you're saying all makes perfect sense and conforms to
> the
> way I envison SBS working in my environment. I'm just always befuddled by
> postings I see from people who say their SBS is denying a user log in
> because
> the license count has been exceeded. If what all of you are saying is
> correct, how do you explain that SBS behavior?
>
> "Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Steve Foster [SBS MVP] wrote:
>>
>> >The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
>> >sufficient CALs, you're golden.
>>
>> Slight rephrase:
>>
>> >The key issue is: if you've bought and installed what you believe to be
>> >sufficient (working on the people/devices model we've been talking
>> >about)
>> >CALs, you're golden.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
>> ---------------------------------------
>> MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.
>>