Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«230 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Comfortador
Jul 31, 2003

Not even *my* powers can save CoX.

So I have very little experience with KMS style licensing. I set a server up on a whim when my VDI project called for it, so it's always been a source of "I dunno" when I had issues. I started installing some machines with Win10 2004 and I'm having the "You don't have enough activations" error message when they are trying to activate. Does Windows 10 count each version number as a separate count for activations? I should have a bunch of Win10 machines out there activating. Is there a quick way around this if thats the case?

Thanks guys, appreciate any input. I've had to interact with it so drat little and now it's coming back to bite me.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

lol internet.
Sep 4, 2007
the internet makes you stupid

Any reason you're not doing active directory based licensing? Same key as KMS just choose AD based.

But to answer your question though before you actually activate the KMS server you need X amount of active computers. Not sure what the count is for Windows 10 but Windows 7 was 25 active PCs on the network trying to activate via KMS before it becomes an active KMS. Server OS is like 5 active servers. But go AD activation if possible, it's the new thing and easier.

Comfortador
Jul 31, 2003

Not even *my* powers can save CoX.

lol internet. posted:

Any reason you're not doing active directory based licensing? Same key as KMS just choose AD based.

But to answer your question though before you actually activate the KMS server you need X amount of active computers. Not sure what the count is for Windows 10 but Windows 7 was 25 active PCs on the network trying to activate via KMS before it becomes an active KMS. Server OS is like 5 active servers. But go AD activation if possible, it's the new thing and easier.

Is it fairly easy to switch over, and it won't screw with VDI in any way? (Horizon)

For the record it is still 25 for Windows clients, and 5 for Windows server clients. I'm still getting the standard "You don't have enough client activations" even though when I run a slmgr /dlv it showed 50 on the count. Ugh.

edit: Eh, I just decided to do it once I read the KMS and AD style can exist together. At the very least it immediately resolved by test machine. So... yay and thanks for the suggestion. To answer your question, we used to use KMS before I was hired here, so on the fly when I was told it was required I just seamlessly went that route.

Comfortador fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Jul 31, 2020

snackcakes
May 7, 2005

A joint venture of Matsumura Fishworks and Tamaribuchi Heavy Manufacturing Concern



Yam Slacker

I've come across a problem in Azure that has been pretty hard for me to google.

I've got a WVD Hostpool and a Standard Load Balancer so my VMs can share a Public IP Address

Somehow I've broken it so that when I add new VMs to the hostpool they have no external internet access, until I add them to the Backend Pool of the Load Balancer

This is preventing the VMs from having the Windows Virtual Desktop Agent and Bootloader installed, which means they don't join the hostpool automatically. Azure considers the VM deployment a failure because of this

As a result I have to add the VM to the Load Balancer Backend Pool manually, and then manually install the agents and register it with the hostpool

Life is hell

Wizard of the Deep
Sep 25, 2005


snackcakes posted:

I've come across a problem in Azure that has been pretty hard for me to google.

I've got a WVD Hostpool and a Standard Load Balancer so my VMs can share a Public IP Address

Somehow I've broken it so that when I add new VMs to the hostpool they have no external internet access, until I add them to the Backend Pool of the Load Balancer

This is preventing the VMs from having the Windows Virtual Desktop Agent and Bootloader installed, which means they don't join the hostpool automatically. Azure considers the VM deployment a failure because of this

As a result I have to add the VM to the Load Balancer Backend Pool manually, and then manually install the agents and register it with the hostpool

Life is hell

Are you putting them behind a restrictive Network Security Group?

Are they being joined to a working subnet?

Are they being joined to the RIGHT subnet?

snackcakes
May 7, 2005

A joint venture of Matsumura Fishworks and Tamaribuchi Heavy Manufacturing Concern



Yam Slacker

Wizard of the Deep posted:

Are you putting them behind a restrictive Network Security Group?

Are they being joined to a working subnet?

Are they being joined to the RIGHT subnet?

Not a restrictive NSG, definitely a working and correct subnet

Someone who wasn't me setup a basic load balancer for old VDIs (which are gone now) which I replaced with a standard load balancer. I see no reason why this would be an issue but... the problem started soon after.

It's probably something stupid and unrelated that I'm not seeing

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zaepho
Oct 31, 2013


snackcakes posted:

I've got a WVD Hostpool and a Standard Load Balancer so my VMs can share a Public IP Address
Would this not be what a NAT gateway would be used for?
What is the need for e single inbound public IP to be associated with the VMs in a WVD hostpool?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«230 »