none
Setting up Essentials 2012 R2 as Hyper-V host

    Question

  • Hi,

    Following up on this archived post from the pre-release:

    Windows Server 2012 R2 Essentials Hyper-V host

    I have two questions:

    1. Is it still the case that the only way to install a Hyper-V host for E2012R2 is to build your own media using these instructions? http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn293253.aspx That puts a pretty big obstacle in the way of using this new licensing right.

    2. Susan Bradley mentions, "please be very very aware that you are only licensed to host a vm of essentials.  NO OTHER vm/guest is allowed to be hosted when Essentials is a hyperV host like this." Is there a reference on this? Does it perhaps apply only to OEM installs? I'm using a Volume License, and the VL Product Use Rights don't seem to mention this only-Essentials-as-guest provision:  "3. If both permitted Instances are running, the Instance in the Physical OSE may be used only to run hardware virtualization software, provide hardware virtualization services, or run software to manage and service operation system environments [plural!] on the licensed server."

    Mark Berry
    MCB Systems


    Saturday, November 16, 2013 12:50 AM

Answers

  • The other licensing rights granted to the Hyper-V role are buried in yet a third place in the PUR. And no, I don't feel motivated to look for it yet again just to prove a point. Benefit of not being a Microsoft employee; I don't have to. I can tell you that I've seen it before. I have had the same discussions that Susan has (as MVPs, we sat in on the same conference calls where the lawyers said this was so), and it does all line up. You can take that or leave it, as you see fit. You'd be the one at legal risk, not me.
    Saturday, November 16, 2013 6:38 AM
  • 1) Yes, that is still the case.

    2) What Susan says is also still true. As far as a reference, the PUR is as good as any. You are right that it doesn't call out that provision explicitly. HOWEVER, the PUR *grants* rights...and as such, unless a right is EXPLICITLY granted, you must operate as though you do NOT have that right.  For example, the "1+2" rights for Server Standard are granted under the "general terms" for that product category, as mentioned on page 27. Essentials is a "Specialty Server" category, and running additional OSEs is not granted by the Universal Terms, the Specialty Server General Terms, and the "one physical and one virtual" is only granted to Essentials by the "Additional Terms" of that product.

    So again, every right is actually clearly granted in that document. And no additional OSEs are granted, thus you can conclude you don't have them.

    Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:11 AM
  • If it helps, this stance is also backed up by the Essentials team in this blog post. Specifically, note the first comment after the main article (written by the PGM, so by no means a random comment.)

    http://blogs.technet.com/b/sbs/archive/2013/09/03/understanding-licensing-for-windows-server-2012-r2-essentials-and-the-windows-server-essentials-experience-role.aspx

    Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:46 PM

All replies

  • 1) Yes, that is still the case.

    2) What Susan says is also still true. As far as a reference, the PUR is as good as any. You are right that it doesn't call out that provision explicitly. HOWEVER, the PUR *grants* rights...and as such, unless a right is EXPLICITLY granted, you must operate as though you do NOT have that right.  For example, the "1+2" rights for Server Standard are granted under the "general terms" for that product category, as mentioned on page 27. Essentials is a "Specialty Server" category, and running additional OSEs is not granted by the Universal Terms, the Specialty Server General Terms, and the "one physical and one virtual" is only granted to Essentials by the "Additional Terms" of that product.

    So again, every right is actually clearly granted in that document. And no additional OSEs are granted, thus you can conclude you don't have them.

    Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:11 AM
  • Hi Cliff,

    Thanks for your reply.

    Re. 2), my understanding of what Susan says is that there can be only _one_ VM under an E2012R2 host, and it must be E2012R2 guest.

    You raise the example of Standard. What if I want to run a FPP of Windows 7 Ultimate as a guest? Or a Linux guest? My understanding of the Hyper-V role, at least under Standard, is that you can run as many guests as you want as long as the guest PUR allows running as a virtual instance. In other words, beyond the "+2", the guest must bring the necessary license.

    Okay so Essentials can't be run as a generic 2012 R2 Hyper-V server--you have to run Essentials as a guest, with the DC role etc. But why can't I, as with Standard, bring in other guests, as long as the guest is licensed? It's the part where Susan says, "NO OTHER vm/guest is allowed to be hosted" that I'm not getting.

    Mark Berry
    MCB Systems



    • Edited by mcbsys Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:45 AM
    Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:39 AM
  • Again, nothing in the PUR grants you any rights to run ANY other OSEs, licensed or otherwise. I'm not saying the licensing makes sense from a rational standpoint, but from a legal standpoint, that is just the way it is.
    Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:48 AM
  • I don't see where Essentials is any different from Standard with respect to running "additional OSEs" like Windows 7 or Linux. Do you?

    And yes, rationally speaking, it seems odd that MS would go to great lengths to specify 25+ OSs that will run under Hyper-V, but then only legally allow you to run the same OS that is physically installed on the host.

    Saturday, November 16, 2013 6:34 AM
  • The other licensing rights granted to the Hyper-V role are buried in yet a third place in the PUR. And no, I don't feel motivated to look for it yet again just to prove a point. Benefit of not being a Microsoft employee; I don't have to. I can tell you that I've seen it before. I have had the same discussions that Susan has (as MVPs, we sat in on the same conference calls where the lawyers said this was so), and it does all line up. You can take that or leave it, as you see fit. You'd be the one at legal risk, not me.
    Saturday, November 16, 2013 6:38 AM
  • Cliff,

    Thank you for your contributions to the discussion and to the community.

    Mark Berry
    MCB Systems



    • Edited by mcbsys Saturday, November 16, 2013 4:58 PM
    Saturday, November 16, 2013 4:57 PM
  • If it helps, this stance is also backed up by the Essentials team in this blog post. Specifically, note the first comment after the main article (written by the PGM, so by no means a random comment.)

    http://blogs.technet.com/b/sbs/archive/2013/09/03/understanding-licensing-for-windows-server-2012-r2-essentials-and-the-windows-server-essentials-experience-role.aspx

    Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:46 PM
  • Thank you, that is helpful and pretty definitive. I see from the follow-on comments that others are also questioning this odd restriction. Assuming his statement reflects Microsoft's actual intent, they could do a better job of clarifying that in the PUR.

    Mark Berry
    MCB Systems

    Saturday, November 16, 2013 6:08 PM
  • I've got a question about this:

    If you have 1 license of each (1 for Essentials, 1 for Standard), can you do this?:

    A) Use Standard as your Hyper-V host, and run the 2 VM's of Standard that you have rights to

    AND

    B) Do a P2V and put Essentials on that Standard Hyper-V host and still utilize the other 2 Standard VM's

    Or does Essentials as a VM limit your host licensing for other products?  This same question applies to using Datacenter as a host too.

    And I think Sue had mentioned that CAL's are required when you run Standard as a Hyper-V host, or something like that.... but I'm just talking about server OS licensing here.

    Saturday, November 23, 2013 5:48 PM
  • You really shouldn't hijack a thread.
    Saturday, November 23, 2013 11:28 PM
  • Here's a helpful explanation from the licensing perspective:

    http://titlerequired.com/2013/09/17/essentials-2012-r2-the-role-licensing/

    Hope it helps!

    Friday, November 29, 2013 12:42 AM
  • I don't think of Joe's question as a hijack. It is related, and also the solution to the original problem.

    Yes, run standard as the host and you have no restriction on the number of (separately licensed) instances you can run, one of them being Essentials. You get the '1+2' from Standard (for your Exchange and SQL/RDS?), and Essentials as your DC on a separate license.The one I'm unclear on is if one purchases 2*Standard licenses, then exercises the right to make one instance run the Essentials role. Total number of virtual instances for this scenario? 3 or 4?

    Saturday, November 30, 2013 6:04 AM
  • Hi everybody!

    I have finally put up a hopefully easy to understand and follow step-by-step guide on how to create a clean Hyper-V host ISO from the original Windows Server 2012 R2 Essentials ISO using Microsoft's Windows 8.1 ADK. As stated before, this is required in order to be able to install Server 2012 R2 Essentials as a VM on "itself".

    You can find the guide on my blog:

    http://techie-blog.blogspot.de/2014/02/windows-server-2012-r2-essentials.html

    Regards,

    Anguel



    • Edited by AnguelS Friday, February 28, 2014 1:20 PM
    Friday, February 28, 2014 1:19 PM