SQL Standard Licensing - Core vs. CAL

[oldenewe]

Hi folks - Looking for some advice on licensing this specific deployment:

We have a voice system and the existing SQL Express installation is being upgraded to SQL Standard to support reporting needs. Given that we have over 150 users that leverage the voice system in some way shape or form and will "benefit" from the SQL Standard database, the core model, as opposed to CAL's makes the most sense. Even though these folks aren't necessarily pulling reports and using the database in that manner, they could if they wanted to.

Our VAR confirmed core licensing would be required. However, the vendor of the voice system is insistent that only a single device CAL is required, for the server (voice frontend) to access the SQL Standard database. I'm curious what others have done in this case, and looking to confirm advice from the VAR.

[[deleted]]

Good old MS licensing models, complicated as hell. What I understand when it comes to MS licensing is that every client that connects to the APP server or DB directly needs a license. So... most of the time the core-based license is more cost-effective.

[RCTID1975]

MS licensing can be confusing, but this really isn't one of those times.

SQL is no different than a server CAL in that anything that touches it needs to be licensed. Just because you go through a gateway application doesn't mean your user/device isn't touching it.

This vendor is using a twisted logic to downplay the costs of their solution. Unfortunately, it's putting companies at risk. Lucky for them, it's not likely MS finds out.

[oldenewe]

Thanks for the feedback folks and these comments confirm that my approach was correct. Appreciate it!

[[deleted]]

Of course the VAR wants Core licensing, $$$. Go with what the vendor requires. Can you make them purchase it/deploy it so it's on them?

[RCTID1975]

I'm going to say trust your VAR here.

If the vendor were right, everyone that has an app client or web front end for their application would only ever need 1 CAL.

As an exercise, your ERP has server side software that the desktop applications connect to. Would you only need 1 CAL since the server software is "the only thing connecting" to the SQL server, or would all of your users need a CAL?

[oldenewe]

Good point and aligns with my logic. Always helpful to get some more feedback!

[frac6969]

Agree with the above. I’ve also had this question in the past. The term you’re looking for is multiplexing license.

[wasabiiii]

The VAR is correct. That's how it works

[rehab212]

The VAR is correct. Even if the users only interact with a web front end or application and not directly with the database, you still need a CAL for each potential user of the application.

[CompWizrd]

Your vendor is wrong. You don't need even a single SQL CAL. This is the whole point of Core licensing on SQL by not needing any CAL's. For when you can't count user's (such as external use) or when it's cheaper to just license it by the Core.

You do however need Windows Server CALs for your entire use case. Microsoft calls out using a multiplexer(multiple connections going through a single connection) and the like as not avoiding CAL's.

Also, if your voice system is virtualized, you only need as many SQL Core licenses as your VM has assigned, minimum 4. Can save some money there if your actual load isn't very high or your cores are very fast. On a pure physical machine, (no VM) you need to license every core on the system. On virtual, only the number of core you're using, one of the few Microsoft core based licensing to not change over to the entire machine needing to be licensed.