7 Replies Latest reply on Oct 19, 2009 2:17 PM by Jim Sculley

    Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses

    Jim Sculley

      If we have  2 dedicated Windows servers, one for  for the archive and one for the database, how should we handle the Windows Server Client Access Licenses?  If we have 50 EPDM licenses, do we need 50 CALs for each server?  Are PDM clients connecting to one or the other?  Or both?

       

      Jim S.

        • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
          Jeff Sweeney

          That is an interesting question!

           

          I don't know about the legality of my answer...but every user does connect to the SQL server. Only the Enterprise service connects to the archive server, users themselves do not connect to it.

           

          I wonder if it is possible that the database server would need all 50 cals and the archive server wouldn't need any?

            • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
              Jim Sculley
              Only the Enterprise service connects to the archive server,

               

              Really?  I would have expected that there would be a direct connection between clients and the archive server during checkin/checkout.  From a CAL perspective, I think even file transfers qualify as a connection to the server.

               

              The MS description of CALs is clear as mud.

               

              Jim S.

                • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
                  Jeff Sweeney

                  This is pretty muddy.

                   

                  On the database server an actual connection is made.

                   

                  The archive server a file is simply copied to the client, does that count as a connection? Does that consume a CAL?

                   

                  Sorry Jim, I'm going to go sit back down in the back of the class. I am asking more questions than I am answering. I am defiantly going to watch this thread, I hope you get some answers.

                    • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
                      Jim Sculley

                      I've submitted the question to my VAR.  I'll post here if I get a definitive answer.

                       

                      Jim S.

                      • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
                        Jim Sculley

                        The Knowledge Base does an excellent job of answering the wrong question:

                         

                        ===============================

                        Solution Id: S-037994

                         

                        Question: How many Windows® Server CALs should a user buy to use for Enterprise PDM licenses?

                         

                        Answer:  When a SolidWorks Enterprise PDM client license is purchased, it provides one CAL (Client Access License) to connect to the server.  Below is what is officially stated from our licensing page (http://www.solidworks.com/sw/eula_en.htm).

                         

                        1.D.  Additional License Terms for Enterprise PDM.  DS SolidWorks licenses the Enterprise PDM software on a Server + Client Access License [CAL] model.  You may use the Enterprise PDM software within a network or other multi-station/client environment, provided you have one (1) Enterprise PDM license per user concurrently connected to the Enterprise PDM vault or database server.  The terms of the Microsoft® SQL Server™ 2005 Standard Edition, Runtime Restricted-Use Software license are delivered with orders for Enterprise PDM software and are incorporated herein by reference

                        ===============================

                         

                         

                        Jim S.

                        • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
                          Jim Sculley

                          My VAR didn't have an answer.  One of SolidWorks EPDM technical guys couldn't answer the question either.  He said he doesn't recall anyone ever asking the question.  I found this article which spells some things out in layman's terms, btu there is still some room for interpretation.  For example, the article states:

                           

                          "A CAL                      gives you the legal right to connect to a server application                      such as Windows Server. Not all CALs are created equal, however.                      A CAL is targeted to a specific server application."

                           

                          No definition of 'server application' is provided.  If EPDM is the 'server application' then one might assume that EPDM CALs are all that is required.  But if 'server application' only refers to applications that are part of Windows Server itself, then separate CALs would be needed.

                           

                          Then the article gives a more complicated example:

                           

                          "Now, let's                      throw Exchange Server into the mix. If you have 25 users,                      you need to purchase 25 Exchange Server CALs in addition to                      25 Windows CALs for that server. Likewise, other Microsoft                      server applications such as SQL Server, Project Server, Host                      Integration Server, and others, require their own CALs. Let's                      expand the example and say that you have 25 users who need                      access to the server for printing and file sharing. 20 of                      those users need access to Exchange Server, and 10 need access                      to SQL Server. You need 25 Windows CALs, 20 Exchange Server                      CALs, and 10 SQL Server CALs, for a total of 55 CALs."

                           

                          This seems to indicate that something like EPDM CALs would *not* eliminate the need for Windows Server CALs.

                           

                          All this research has brought forth other questions as well.  Our VAR touts the fact that they include SQL server with EPDM.  What kind of license is it?  If it is a 'processor' license, does it cover a quad core server?  If it isn't a processor license, does it include the CALs?  If so, what kind of CALs are they?

                           

                          Frankly, the lack of answers from my VAR and from SW is shocking.  If they don't know the answer to these questions, it seems that there could be thousands of improperly licensed EPDM installation out there, exposing those companies using EPDM to enormous legal/monetary risk.

                           

                          What I thought was a very simple question that I needed to have answered to formulate an accurate price for an EPDM implementation has turned into a 'What is the meaning of life' kind of question.

                           

                          Or maybe I'm misunderstanding the whole thing.  Either way, definitive answers from SW would be nice.

                           

                           

                          Jim S.

                          • Re: Windows Server Licenses and EPDM Licenses
                            Jim Sculley

                            All right.  The 'official' word from SW is that Windows Server CALs are *not* required.  They say that PDM clients are not using Windows Server resources or services on the archive server.  All communication is via TCP/IP and UDP protocols and the PDM client licenses are providing the necessary CALs to connect to the SQL server.

                             

                            I have sent an email to Microsoft's licensing services to verify that connecting to a server machine via unauthenticated TCP/IP from a local area network is exempt from the CAL requirements.  It sounds like the answer should be 'Yes'.  If so, I can put this issue to rest.

                             

                            Jim S.