On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Ken Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No - you need a client license when you use Windows authentication
> infrastructure.
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Ken Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In Windows 2003 days, you definitely did not need CALs if all access was
> unauthenticated at the Windows level.
With respect, Microsoft's license documents do not appear to agree
with you, and we've had reports that their License Specialists support
that. Keep in mind that tech support or sales people will often say
what they think is right, but like all humans, they are sometimes
wrong. In such cases, the EULA is the controlling document.
I've cited chapter and verse from Microsoft's licensing
documentation. Some of it is quite clear, some more open to
interpretation. But the Win 2003 EULA seems pretty explict on the
"you must acquire a Windows CAL for each individual person
("User") or Device that accesses or uses the Server Software" part.
If you can go back and find how I'm mis-reading the Windows 2003
EULA, or find some other document that superceeds it, please do so.
(I'm sure there's lot of people still using Win 2003 as a web server
who would like to know!) If this is based on third-party statements
or some TAM's non-binding verbal reassurances, well, I really believe
the EULA is going to win that argument.
Regards,
-- Ben
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
