Exchange Server 2010 RTM and Organizational Health miscalculation

Exchange Server 2010 is starting to get some traction, with companies beginning to install it and put it into their test labs.

An issue - that is obviously a flat out bug - is that the Exchange Management Console (EMC) for Exchange Server 2010 misreports the number of Enterprise Client Access Licenses (CALs) that are required. It does this due to miscalculating Exchange ActiveSync policies.

To calculate the number of Enterprise CALs required, open the EMC and click on the Microsoft Exchange On-Premises node in the left-most pane of the console. After it completes expansion, in the right-hand Action pane, click "Collect Organizational Health Data" and then follow the prompts in the wizard. When the wizard is done, you'll see an image similar to the one below. Note in the image that the License Summary reports needing 2003 Standard CALs and Enterprise CALs.

Organizational health for a single server with 2003 mailboxes

If you look at the Default Exchange ActiveSync policy, you can determine why. See the following two pictures:

Default Exchange ActiveSync policy property sheet, Device TabDefault Exchange ActiveSync policy property sheet, Device Applications tab

 

Note the text in both that indicates that MODIFYING the policies on the tab requires an Enterprise CAL. That is correct. The default policies, included in the Standard CAL (which are illustrated in the above two images), are available on this page. The specific licensing page for Exchange Server 2010 CALs is here.

However, Organizational Health currently reports that an Enterprise CAL is required if any of the above policies are set. That is incorrect.

In summary, there has been no change to the licensing of Exchange ActiveSync and the policies that were associated with Standard CALs in Exchange Server 2007 SP1 continue to be the same for Exchange Server 2010. Hopefully, the Organizational Health tool will be quickly repaired.

Until next time...

If there are things you would like to see written about, please let me know!

Published Tuesday, December 22, 2009 5:06 PM by michael
Filed under: ,

Comments

No Comments