-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Message: 29 > Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:32:07 +0000 (GMT) > From: Tom Crummey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [Samba] how legal is samba > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Hello Ed, > > My understanding of the licensing issue is that *any* client that uses > a windows server, whether directly, or indirectly via Samba requires > a Client Access license.
AFAIK this was the case with NT4. And AFAIK they changed it in win2k so that you had no CAL licensing incentive to install samba servers into a win2k domain, so now you need a CAL for each client that *authenticates* to a Windows 2000 server. Thus, if you run a samba domain, your clients all authenticate to a samba domain controller, and no CALs are needed for Windows 2000 member servers (as respecting file/print service - you still need CALs for other services such as MSSQL etc). Of course, you should read the EULAs etc yourself and/or ask your legal representative for their opinion. IMHO, better to avoid agreeing to the EULAs in the first place, then they have no legal basis to audit your premises. Regards, Buchan - -- |--------------Another happy Mandrake Club member--------------| Buchan Milne Mechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone * Work +27 82 472 2231 * +27 21 8828820x202 Stellenbosch Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za GPG Key http://ranger.dnsalias.com/bgmilne.asc 1024D/60D204A7 2919 E232 5610 A038 87B1 72D6 AC92 BA50 60D2 04A7 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/vkFxrJK6UGDSBKcRAguTAJ9VYq2iZu2bgeh2G82SOl2HmkPC2ACfTjG4 irUWsWExSxrNJyTcHYTG07Y= =zrZm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
