Thanks, David. Now I am confused.
Isn’t the purpose of the “Submitter Mode Locked” to enable “Requesters” to interact (including providing supplemental information) with tickets they have “Submitted”, without the cost of a license? Not tickets that others have “Submitted”, but only where they were the “Submitter”. In the case of a user created ARS application, the requirement for purchasing licenses is limited to folks who need to update tickets “Submitted” by others? And at the same time, cannot users who have no license other than the free read license, browse the tickets contained within a user created ARS application, freely viewing a ticket regardless of who “Submitted” it? Chas Subject: Re: License Question... Let me lead off by again reiterating that a license is not necessarily programmatic – i.e. a license does not mean that something is entered into AR System. It means you are legally enabled to utilize the product under the terms of your purchase contract. So to answer the question, yes – you have to purchase the licensed rights for requesters to use the SRM product. However, there is nothing to programmatically enter into AR System to enable the users to exercise the licensed right to use the product as defined in the purchase contract. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Roberts, Chas Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 06:53 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: License Question... Thanks, David. So to be perfectly clear… Would these “requesters” need licenses (other than the free “read” license) if they only submit their own requests, check status on their requests, look at existing tickets, and update tickets they have submitted, assuming “Submitter Mode Lock” is enabled? Chas Subject: Re: License Question... Ø You are saying this because the 14,000 employees in your example may need to work on tickets others have submitted? No. In fact, they cannot work on tickets others have submitted because they’re not the “workers” – they are the requesters. They only need to submit their own requests, check status on their requests and view any self-service knowledge information provided. The “y” group (in your example) that would work on the tickets would have a Service Management Specialist user license - which is a license bundle that includes a write license for SRM technicians, analysts and administrators enabling them to modify data not owned by them. Or, if they work on the Service Desk rather than within Service Request Management, they’d have Incident/Problem Management user write licenses. And so on… -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Roberts, Chas Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 04:53 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: License Question... David, You are saying this because the 14,000 employees in your example may need to work on tickets others have submitted? My impression was that if you have “x” number of employees that use the system -- but only “y” work on tickets sent by others, you’d require “y” fixed licenses or maybe “y/20” floating licenses… Assuming “submitter mode locked” was in use and thus submitters could interact with their own tickets, but only read others’s tickets… While the “y” group could do the ticket management (such as a help desk… working on problems submitted by areas outside their area) True? Thanks, Chas Subject: Re: License Question... The ratio for the floating Self-Service licenses is 100 to 1 – i.e. if you have 14,000 employees that could potentially access the system, you’d need 140 floating licenses. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Jason Miller Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 01:03 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: License Question... ** David, The statement "it represents the total number of users that your organization expects to access...", that does not hold true for floating Self-Service correct? Say we have "BMC Remedy Self Service - Floating User Add-On License 20-Pk Lsn" and have 14,000 potential users who would access SRM (our total expected user count). Since it is a floating license this should cover the 14k people who may need to request something from our IT dept or search the KB? Assuming no more than 20 people at a time are trying to use Self-Service functionality, correct? Jason On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Easter, David <david_eas...@bmc.com<mailto:david_eas...@bmc.com>> wrote: The BMC Remedy Self-Service license is a business license, not a programmatic license. It’s nothing to do with read or write licenses. It represents the total number of users that your organization expects to access Service Request Management to submit or check status on service requests and utilize Remedy Knowledge Management based self-service knowledge articles. Self-Service pricing is based on that number of users. Additional, and programmatic, licenses are required for the “back-end” processing of such service requests. Those additional licenses represent the write licenses needed for your SRM Analysts/technicians, Service Desk technicians, Change Managers, Asset Managers, etc. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>] On Behalf Of Matthew Perrault Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 08:25 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Subject: Re: License Question... Sorry forgot to Add. ITSM 7.1 ARS 7.1 Patch 8 Thanks From: Matthew Perrault Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 10:10 AM To: 'arslist@ARSLIST.ORG<mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>' Subject: License Question... All, Currently we are paying for: BMC Remedy Self Service − User Add−On License According to BMC they state it is needed by end users to submit a request? But That doesn’t make sense. All you need to submit a request is to have a Read LICENSE, and Service Request User permissions. Now, I’ve done some searching on the web (couldn’t find anything in the documentation…) and apparently this “BMC Remedy Self Service” LICENSE is needed by the Request System. But How is it needed and Why is it needed? We have the BMC:SR Mgmt Application license, is this the same thing? Then I take a look at the quantity of these Licenses that we have, and they seem either WAY too low, or WAY too high. Any help would be appreciated, Thanks Matt P. _attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ________________________________ This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the author's intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please delete all copies, both electronic and printed, and contact the author immediately.
