Your virtualization team is evaluating physical (host-based) versus virtual (per-VM) operating-system licensing for a cluster that uses live migration. Which statement accurately identifies a key difference between the two licensing models?
A virtual license can be reassigned to a different host only once every 90 days, making it unsuitable for environments that use live migration.
A physical license is tied to the hardware chassis; when a VM is live-migrated, the destination host must have its own license because the license does not follow the workload.
A virtual license is calculated by counting every physical CPU core in the cluster, giving unlimited VM rights but little cost benefit for small environments.
A physical license is assigned to each virtual machine, allowing it to remain valid regardless of which hypervisor the VM runs on.
With host-based (physical) licensing, the license is permanently assigned to the physical server hardware; any virtual machines that move to that host are covered, but the license does not travel with a VM when it migrates, so every potential destination host must already be licensed. Per-VM (virtual) licensing, on the other hand, attaches the license to the individual virtual machine and can move with it if the vendor's mobility terms are met. The other statements are incorrect because they either reverse this relationship, confuse core-based host licensing with per-VM licensing, or describe limitations (such as the 90-day reassignment rule) that do not characterize host licensing itself.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is live migration in virtualization?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does per-VM licensing differ from host-based licensing?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the 90-day reassignment rule for virtualization licenses?