Windows Server Summit 2024
Mar 26 2024 08:00 AM - Mar 28 2024 04:30 PM (PDT)
Microsoft Tech Community

RDS and HP Thin Clients

Copper Contributor

Hi all,

I've got a RDS server with 20 CALs.

I have some HP Thin Client with W7 that work properly.

I recently added some new Thin Client with ThinOS (linux). Those one are constently having the 60 minutes session warning.

It seemes the RDS server doesn't attribute them a CAL.

Is this behaviour normal ?

Best regards.

5 Replies
Hi I have a similar question about RDS Device CALs and Linux OS Thin Clients. Question is how does it work with a Linux device like the HP ThinPro. Mike D also asked how the per device CAL is stored for the same reason 2 years ago.

There doesn't seem to be much help on this subject.
Yes and it's very frustrating.
I made another experience.
I added a totally new ThinClient with Linux and a CAL has been used for it.
But all my old ThinClient that were in W7 before and I had to migrate to Linux HP ThinOs are not considered anymore by the server. And I'm limited to 60min sessions with them...
device CALs cannot be reassigned I believe so your W7 ThinClients may have consumed the licence already. My thinking is if the Hardware ID of the Device is some sort of hash of the clients MAC address (quick and dirty way of ID'ing a remote machine) then it may still be identifying the old W7 ThinClients as activated and looking for the Windows 7 Registry Keys to validate them. It wont find them so it drops the session after a default period possibly the 60 minutes you have identified.
have a look at this and see if it helps

Unfortunateley, I don't see how I can solve my own situation with this. It's nearly the oppisite situation as mine, as I only have one CAL received for a single ThinOs Client, and no other (even temporary ones) for the reste of my ThinOsMigratedFromW7 ones. Anyway, thank you for your help !
Sorry I couldn't help, I am finding this a difficult subject to get answers on. Linux and Microsoft Licencing are two uncomfortable bedfellows as the Open Source nature of Linux means that MS is rather reluctant to publish details of how its licencing works with it I fear.