If memory serves me, this is the way ADSM licensing was back in the 1.2 days. Except back then I believe the server would eventually cut you off if you ran out of license, and you couldn't just register another license without paying for it.
IMHO, the danger with capacity-based (or data-based) licensing is that we get more data every year and the cost of storage goes down every year. The expectation should be that the capacity-based license fees should go down every year to compensate for the growth. But if the vendor choose to not lower the license fee rates, then they automatically get a bump in revenue by default, without having done anything. I'll agree with others who have said that any licensing scheme should be relatively easy to figure out, and the current scheme is not. If TSM provided the information (e.g., via Q LIC), then I think most folks would be a lot happier about the new scheme. ..Paul At 06:19 AM 8/2/2007, Richard Rhodes wrote:
This is interesting. The other day I was talking to my manager about TSM licensing and mentioned the big thread about licensing confusion. He mentioned that he would LIKE it if TSM used a simple capacity-based license. His reasoning was that it would directly tie the cost of TSM back to what we use it for, and let him more easily force issues around long/big retensions we have. Rick
-- Paul Zarnowski Ph: 607-255-4757 Manager, Storage Services Fx: 607-255-8521 719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801 Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
