Ah, good point....but, I do believe it's working, as they intended. As a phantom isn't necessarily associated with a particular 'device'. They're more like individual telnet users, in most instance of their usage - IHMO.
Hence, the rationale by IBM that any use of their APIs will consume a database license appears to be correct. As some sites where exploiting this "loophole", which is the key motivation to do this (limiting current and future revenue loss). Device licensing is about an individual end-user being allowed to have numerous interactive connections initiated by them from their workstation. Not quite the same for a phantoms, otherwise you have the same "loophole". But a fair call that a phantom should be included too. Of course, if you're using your own Sockets, MQSeries, etc. APIs (ie., via GCI in UV)- then you won't be consuming a license. Regards, David -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adrian Matthews Sent: Thursday, 21 April 2005 3:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [U2] IBM Licensing Requirement - MQ Series Where I think IBM has messed up a bit with the new phantom licensing is that it doesn't respect device licensing. I can start 10 sessions using wIntegrate or UniObjects and only consume one license, but if I start 10 mq phantoms (or any other license consuming functionality) then I consume 10 licenses. Also the device licenses can't be shared around between wIntegrate and UniObjects. ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
