I don't even bother with manual spreadsheet; I do scribble on small yellow pad once a year. We've gone from 'node-level' licensing that made no sense -- an SP-frame is a node, with up to 32 CPUs in 16 boxes under ADSM 2.x (needs 16 node registrations at the server); to node-level where a box is a node (but you may need to set it up under several IDs, each of which looks like a separate node on the server); to CPU-based licensing (and we paid about 60% of list on each node to convert to cpu-based licenses) where you may still need to define the system multiple times to TSM, but at least it isn't trying to count any more; to the current 'processor value base' -- and I'm not going to try counting systems until renewal time (Novemeber, for us).
And I see I left out the cpu-based pricing where server cpus cost more than client cpus, and if someone's laptop had an accessable file share it was a server . . . My over-all cpu count has been constant for the last few years; we picked up a few extra licenses when we did the node to cpu conversion, and I've a few systems (SAP App servers) that don't need to be backed up, so those cpu licenses get used elsewhere. But -- until the product does a better job of tracking -- I'm going to stick to my once per year scratch-pad audit and reconciliation; I'm not paid for, nor does my job description cover, vendor licensing compliance. Tom Kauffman NIBCO, Inc -----Original Message----- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Allen S. Rout Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 9:19 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Pricing model for 5.4 I was a little surprised at Steve's cautious response to my post. Looking over it I think I understand it now, and it makes me want to emphasize that I'm not advocating just ignoring the issue ("Don't worry about it too much"). Focus on the "too much", not the "don't worry". :) If you develop a measure by which you understand your licensure, (and good lord I hope it's automated instead of manual spreadsheet nonsense) then apply it and pay by it. Operate in good faith, but don't angst yourself too much about getting the next significant figure right. We're accustomed to being able to report activity to 10 sig-figs: (TB measures, down to the byte).. it feels odd to have 2. If you try for 4, you'll go insane, and you still won't get it. To bring the conversation back around, if we had a better licensure measure in the server, we could at least have consistent numbers... :) - Allen S. Rout CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance upon this message. If you have received this in error, please notify us immediately by return email and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
