They've liberalized the licensing somewhat for "Windows Web Server 2008",
so it may not be an issue.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/windows_server_2008_license_eased_for_web
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Ognenoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:19 AM
Subject: RE: Client licenses for web apps (was: AD in the DMZ)
Can anyone confirm this? If that's how the license was intended I would
think that would kill Windows as a hosting platform for the majority
people.
- Andy O.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 9:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Client licenses for web apps (was: AD in the DMZ)
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Michael B. Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Obviously, you haven't yet thought about licensing.
Why not use application authentication instead of a/d authentication?
The way I read the Microsoft licensing documentation, it doesn't
matter how you authenticate the user. You need a client license (CAL
or ECL) any time you individually identified a person. So even if
you're running Apache and phpBB, you need a client license for every
phpBB user account. The exception being if you're using Web Server
Edition.
Reference:
"[You need a client license unless] access to the instances of server
software is only through the Internet without being authenticated or
otherwise individually identified by the server software or **through
any other means**." (Emphasis mine.)
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/client-licensing.aspx
-- Ben
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
