WVD and a Windows Server 2016 VM / Licensing

Copper Contributor

Hello all. I have a couple of Win10 multi-session vms set up in several hostpools using the Spring 2020 release of WVD. Works great. I just recently built out a wvd hostpool that includes a Windows Server 2016 vm, built from the Azure Windows Server 2016 gallery image. A Win2016 server vm is needed for a software app that requires it to be installed on a server OS and about 10 users will need access to the server desktop. The WVD hostpool was built and the server virtual machine was created and it was added to a domain and I'm able to log in to it using the Remote Desktop client.....however....., a message always pops up: "Remote Desktop licensing mode is not configured. Remote Desktop Services will stop working in 119 days." 

How do I set up the server virtual machine and/or the wvd hostpool so that this message does not show up anymore? I thought that the WVD agents that get installed on the server as part of the vm creation would take care of this licensing message.

Any feedback on this would be much appreciated.


2 Replies
best response confirmed by J_Bush (Copper Contributor)

@J_Bush  i had a case opened with Microsoft for a similar situation. In our clients situation they had server 2016 just like you and the RDS warning came up. Our clients, because of licensing, face one of a few things. The server is going to look for RDS CALs (see below) which caused the pop-up. The message from the support team was that I needed to install the license role, install the RDS key on the machine, and point the GPO at this machine. We are a CSP so we purchased the correct amount of RDS's 1yr CAL's and did as described. Is your issue similar, if not, what is different? Thanks!

Access desktops powered by Windows Server Remote Desktop Services desktops and apps at no additional cost if you are an eligible Microsoft Remote Desktop Services (RDS) Client Access License (CAL) customer.
Curious, did you install the license role on the session host itself? And if so, was that what was what was recommended by the support team? As opposed to installing the role on a separate server?