Thanks, Del
I have requested them to do so.
- Bent
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager On Behalf Of Del Hoobler
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 5:19 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Spectrum Protect PVU licensing
Hi Bent,
Please have the auditors contact me
07/08/2019 11:15 AM
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Spectrum Protect PVU licensing
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
> Hi,
>
> We are just going through an IBM license audit and to our
> overwhelming astonishment the IBM auditors want to charge us for
> lic
ct to demands for licensing test nodes?
I should mention that we are currently PVU licensed but looking into capacity
licensing so we can evolve our virtual environment backup strategy - but
because of the audit results there is a more than fair chance that Veeam is
going to run with that☹
-
DU
> Date: 04/30/2018 11:33 AM
> Subject: Re: SPP licensing/included with SP Extended Edition/Suite?
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
> Del,
>
> We would like details on SPP licensing costs but can't find anyone from
IBM
> to talk and our li
Del,
We would like details on SPP licensing costs but can't find anyone from IBM
to talk and our license renews in 60-days.
Can you help?
Zoltan Forray
Spectrum Protect (p.k.a. TSM) Software & Hardware Administrator
VMware Administrator
Xymon Administrator
VCU Computer Ce
03/22/2018 04:18 PM
> Subject: Re: SPP licensing/included with SP Extended Edition/Suite?
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
> Strange, I was just in a product briefing and was informed that the
> stored data in the Plus repository counted against the TB in our
>
required licensing to deploy plus.
On Mar 22, 2018, at 2:13 PM, Matthew McGeary
mailto:matthew.mcge...@nutrien.com>> wrote:
Strange, I was just in a product briefing and was informed that the stored data
in the Plus repository counted against the TB in our entitled capacity, not
this 10 VM/TB
lfid=897/ENUS217-552&appname=USN
Del
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" wrote on 03/15/2018
08:51:29 AM:
> From: Zoltan Forray
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Date: 03/15/2018 08:52 AM
> Subject: SPP licensing/included with
Suite
licensing, offload of data from Spectrum Protect Plus to Spectrum
Protect Server is included in Spectrum Protect Plus entitlement. In
this case, the capacity of the data offloaded is not required to be
measured nor does it require additional capacity entitlement.
Please have a look a the
Back a while ago, I could never get ahold of my IBM representative to ask
questions about licensing so I am taking a shot here.
Per Passport, we license IBM Spectrum Protect Extended Edition and IBM
Spectrum Protect Suite.
When going through the Passport software download list, it includes
for licensing
Hi Gary,
I think that, If you have any clients that don't report the capacity usage,
you have to launch some scripts.
See:
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fsupport%2Fknowledgecenter%2Fen%2FSSGSG7_7.1.7%2Fsrv.solutions%2Ft_&am
r over the settings icon and click
Licensing.
The front-end capacity estimate is displayed on the Front-end Usage page.
If a value is displayed in the Not Reporting column, click the number to
identify clients that did not report capacity usage.
To estimate capacity for clients that did not repor
Gary"
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date: 13/11/2017 19:19
Subject:[ADSM-L] getting front end capacity for licensing
Sent by:"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
We have been asked for front end capacity numbers for our tsm
installation.
We have three servers v 7.1.7.1
We have been asked for front end capacity numbers for our tsm installation.
We have three servers v 7.1.7.1 running on RHEL 6.9.
Clients range from 6.0 on up.
Checked the fecapacity field, and those numbers look like pure junk.
Tried using the actual_size field in filespaces table, but this is us
Hi Paul,
There is nothing you need to change with regard the TSM Server to reflect
the change in licensing. What you will need to do periodically (say
monthly, quarterly) will be to run the appropriate IBM provided TB macro
which will report your TB usage so you can ensure that the TSM Server is
We have recently changed from PVU based licensing to the Unified/Terabyte based
licensing model on TSM.
What do I need to do on the TSM system itself to update the licensing? Is there
a file that needs to be updated or a command that needs to be run?
When I run "q lic" it is still s
Unless you are licensing TSM by capacity my understanding is you only pay for
the machines that have the client(s) on them.
~Rick
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of francs
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 4:52 AM
To: ADSM-L
Hi Francois,
Op 27 jun. 2013, om 10:51 heeft francs het
volgende geschreven:
> Hi
>
> Would someone have answer answer for the following TSM licensing scenario:
> We use Veeam to backup our virtual environment to a server. Veeam saves the
> backups to normal OS files.
> W
Hi
Would someone have answer answer for the following TSM licensing scenario:
We use Veeam to backup our virtual environment to a server. Veeam saves the
backups to normal OS files.
We then use the TSM client to backup those files.
Would you license the whole virtual environment or just the
I would like to know the licensing cost of TSM-TDP client for SQL
Could not find any links on the web.
Thanks in Advance.
Satish
+--
|This was sent by satish.vergh...@gmail.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab
Thanks,
I agree. Separate TSM server sounds reasonable. I think IBM may be
deliberately vague in order to make it less tempting for customers to try
something like this.
Hans Chr.
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Zoltan Forray wrote:
> We are on split/dual licensing for the same reason.
We are on split/dual licensing for the same reason. We have . Yes, we had
to setup a separate TSM server and moved the PVU licensed nodes there.
Also we installed ILMT and those on the PVU server have the ILMT agent
installed.
I never heard anything about separating / isolating the tape library
Hi Hans Christian,
Earlier this year we were considering going from PVU to capacity licensing but
as 2/3 of our 1 PB primary pool capacity at that time was 'owned' by two nodes
only, we asked IBM if we somehow could do both licensing schemes.
The answer was we would need two Passport
We are on a volume licensing scheme but we are considering PVU licensing
for a new project since the volume/CPU ratio there is very high. As I
understand we can do this as long as the two different environments are
separate.
I haven't yet got a definitive answer on what IBM means by sep
products.
So far, we have not found any IBM document discussing licensing for cold
standby instances of TSM for Databases. We have also not found any
document that states precisely what event triggers the requirement for
possession of value units for a system with TSM for Databases installed.
The more
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 3:44 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Moving to TSM Capacity based licensing from PVU -
experiences
Ian,
Our company looked into it and thought it may save some $$ and at the same
time simplify the OVERLY complex PVU license model used for TSM/IBM.
I&#x
remember, IBM is run by layers and bookkeeper. So, development made great
software, and then legal got to say something about it.
On 18 jul. 2012, at 19:37, Prather, Wanda wrote:
> Woot!!! How can they release this stuff with a straight face ?!??!!
>
> W
>
>
>
> -Keith Arbogast wrote: -
Woot!!! How can they release this stuff with a straight face ?!??!!
W
-Keith Arbogast wrote: -
>For those who are wavering between that and PVU based, it may help,
>depending on your client mix, to know that the 6.3 client reports
>Processor Vendor, Processor Brand, Processor Type,
panacea but no. It
is an estimate as it has to assume what is a client device and what is a client
to be licensed by PVU. Shame on IBM for constructing a licensing model so unfit
for purpose.
TBH we are well down the path of despair with this whole issue and the assorted
replies strongly
-Keith Arbogast wrote: -
>For those who are wavering between that and PVU based, it may help,
>depending on your client mix, to know that the 6.3 client reports
>Processor Vendor, Processor Brand, Processor Type, Processor Model
>and Processor Count. So, one doesn't need to install the Li
Ian et al;
We have a Capacity Based license now, and so far so good.
For those who are wavering between that and PVU based, it may help, depending
on your client mix, to know that the 6.3 client reports Processor Vendor,
Processor Brand, Processor Type, Processor Model and Processor Count. So,
When we first started renegotiating our last deal, about a year ago, the
discount for ProtecTier was talked about a lot, but I don't know if it was part
of the final package.
We went with capacity-based licensing for two reasons:
1) no one liked dealing with PVUs, and the TSM server
We moved over to per TB licensing last year, and were told categorically
that the only dedupe they would take into account was TSM's dedupe. We
also have ProtecTIER, and they would not take that into account.
Steven
On 16 July 2012 19:22, Stackwick, Stephen wrote:
> Thanks, Rick. Th
ailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Rick
Adamson
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 2:05 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Moving to TSM Capacity based licensing from PVU -
experiences
Steve,
Perhaps I should have stated YMMV as our negotiation with IBM took place when
the cap mo
licensing costs, if you choose another
solution as we did with Data Domain it is not. In the end we asked IBM
to negotiate a middle-ground number but were denied.
I only mention this for those who use Data Domain, or other non-IBM
solutions for dedupe and compression as it will ultimately affect
I've had a couple of customers look at capacity-based licensing, ditto what the
other folks said. IBM will make a different offer to each customer, which
supposedly takes into account the conversion of your existing licenses.
I have one customer who only keeps their backups 2 weeks (r
44 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Moving to TSM Capacity based licensing from PVU -
experiences
Ian,
Our company looked into it and thought it may save some $$ and at the same time
simplify the OVERLY complex PVU license model used for TSM/IBM.
I'll start by sayi
This has been our experience too. We've been running TSM for six years,
and in that time, the number of systems has gone up 4x, the number of
CPUs has gone up about 10x, and the amount of primary backup/archive
data has gone up 50x. We're sticking with the core-based PVU licensing
as
We recently converted to a special hybrid license that is a combination of
PVU and STG based. We are ~600TB primary occupancy (constantly growing)
but have a lot of high-powered multi-processor systems (in research
computing) so it worked out cheaper (per my guy who does licensing) to go
to the
may
know prefers all incoming data to be uncompressed and unencrypted. Since
the TSM servers have no knowledge of the DD processes it reports the raw
storage numbers before compression and deduplication which negatively
affected the capacity licensing pricing.
We opened discussions on this issue with
years or later on.
The only advantage is that the capacity based licensing is more easy to
calculate than the PVU based.
Regards,
Kurt
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] Namens Ian Smith
Verzonden: maandag 16 juli 2012 13:13
Aan: ADSM-L
Hi,
We are in the midst of discussions on moving to capacity-based licensing from
the standard PVU-based method for our site. We have a large number of clients (
licensed via TSM-EE, TDP agents, and on client-device basis ) and around 1PB of
primary pool data. As I understand it, there is no
My employer removed an HP-UX Oracle server from service a couple of years
ago. When the system was active it performed flat file backups with the
TSM backup/archive client and Oracle database backups with TSM for
Databases. My department has been directed to retain both types of
backup for 25 years
thinking about adding an additional TSM server
to our environment to use for an offsite DR. Basically we would
duplicate our onsite data to the new offsite TSM server.
How would we go about licensing for the additional
server? Or does it matter?
There doesn't seem to be any s
-David Tyree wrote: -
>We are thinking about adding an additional TSM server
>to our environment to use for an offsite DR. Basically we would
>duplicate our onsite data to the new offsite TSM server.
>How would we go about licensing for th
We are thinking about adding an additional TSM server to our
environment to use for an offsite DR. Basically we would duplicate our onsite
data to the new offsite TSM server.
How would we go about licensing for the additional server? Or
does it matter
System administrators requesting TSM coverage for new Windows
systems can generally see 'Xeon' and a model designation such
as 'E5420' on the systems property panel. Linux administrators
can usually find similar information in /proc/cpuinfo. I am
occasionally asked to set up TSM coverage for an old
] Per node licensing
Hi all -
Does anyone know if IBM is requiring customers to convert grandfathered per
node licensing to PVU licensing? Is it just for new licenses you want to
purchase, or is there some conversion calculation? I'm lost in tivoli
licensing land.
Please conside
...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Dan Olson
[dol...@mcs.anl.gov]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 7:06 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Per node licensing
Hi all -
Does anyone know if IBM is requiring customers to convert grandfathered per
node licensing to PVU licensing? Is it just for
Hi all -
Does anyone know if IBM is requiring customers to convert grandfathered per
node licensing to PVU licensing? Is it just for new licenses you want to
purchase, or is there some conversion calculation? I'm lost in tivoli
licensing land.
Hi All,
I have TDP for Databases configured to backup MS-SQL databases on a cluster.
TDP is installed on the active and passive nodes.
The SQL DBA has created another SQL server instance on the same box and wants
this backed up using TDP under a different node name.
How does the TDP licensing
Från: Mehdi Salehi [ezzo...@googlemail.com]
Skickat: den 5 juli 2010 12:49
Till: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Ämne: TSM for SAN licensing
Hi,
Is Tivoli Storage Manager for SAN 6.2 licensed per terabyte?
Thanks
Hi,
Is Tivoli Storage Manager for SAN 6.2 licensed per terabyte?
Thanks
] On Behalf Of
Frank Fegert
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:35 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] per-terabyte licensing deals...
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 02:22:42PM -0500, Allen S. Rout wrote:
> Having seen some discussion of recent sighting of per-TB licensing in
&g
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 02:22:42PM -0500, Allen S. Rout wrote:
> Having seen some discussion of recent sighting of per-TB licensing in
> the wild, I trundled over to my business partner to get the skinny.
> Fine BP said no such thing exists to his knowledge.
>
> Could one of
Hey, ho.
Having seen some discussion of recent sighting of per-TB licensing in
the wild, I trundled over to my business partner to get the skinny.
Fine BP said no such thing exists to his knowledge.
Could one of you fine folks who have actually seen one of these go by
provide a few more details
] Open Letter to TSM Product Mangement. Was Per terabyte
licensing
I would like to add:
Whatever you decide is "fair" for licensing the client - whether it be
cores, or TB stored, or wombles, or hooha's, the client should REPORT BACK
to the server how many wombles or hooha's it is
I would like to add:
Whatever you decide is "fair" for licensing the client - whether it be
cores, or TB stored, or wombles, or hooha's, the client should REPORT BACK
to the server how many wombles or hooha's it is using.
The current system is most unfair to the customer, in
hard
Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:42 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
We have sub-capacity licenses for TSM for some of our servers. We had to
agree to install some kind of IBM licensing system. We haven't done it
yet - but it's com
We have sub-capacity licenses for TSM for some of our servers. We had to
agree to install some kind of IBM licensing system. We haven't done it
yet - but it's coming. It will require installing an agent on every server
that has tsm clie
backup space. The most difficulty we encounter is with respect to our
licensing which is necessarily identical to IBMs.
I have thought long and hard about how to decouple client licensing from our
product and stay in compliance with our OEM agreement. I have not come up with
an idea.
I
abyte licensing
From: Kelly Lipp
Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 6:48 pm
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
And remember, too, that the PVU thing contemplated something like a DB2
license. Perhaps you had two or three systems that would run DB2. It did
not contemplate something like TSM where EVERY system i
aller customer has no leverage for expecting special
pricing.
Best Regards,
John D. Schneider
The Computer Coaching Community, LLC
Office: (314) 635-5424 / Toll Free: (866) 796-9226
Cell: (314) 750-8721
Original Message
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
From:
Re: Per terabyte licensing
29/09/2009 09:48
e: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
Kelly,
You are right, IBM must build their license model to ensure the
profit they expect. We can't blame them for doing this as a business.
They can't give their product away for free.
But the PVU based licensing model is a huge problem for
Kelly,
You are right, IBM must build their license model to ensure the
profit they expect. We can't blame them for doing this as a business.
They can't give their product away for free.
But the PVU based licensing model is a huge problem for an
environment like ours that has
go up if IBM doesn't proactively drop their per-TB rates. The same is
true of per-core licensing, of course, but I don't think it's as dramatic.
As Kelly said, any scheme they change to will result in happy and unhappy
customers. I've gotten to the point where I almost do
more sense to charge per TB of retention, of data
sent, or of some tiered system.
But I have also designed our implementation to make the most of that licensing
scheme.
Per TB would be a pretty straight forward licensing method. But I'm sure we'd
all complain about the amount of stat
m
719-266-8777 x7105
STORServer solves your data backup challenges.
Once and for all.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Steven
Langdale
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 12:38 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte l
)208 609 7400 Code: 331817
+ Email: steven.langd...@cat.com
Kelly Lipp
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
28/09/2009 19:00
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
Caterpillar: Confidentia
Langdale
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 11:02 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
My Tivoli S/W rep here in the UK is happy to sell by PVU or per TB.
It sounds like it's not quite made it over the water yet.
Steven Langdale
Global Information Services
0)208 609 7400 Code: 331817
+ Email: steven.langd...@cat.com
"John D. Schneider"
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
28/09/2009 15:38
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
Cat
DSM-L] Age-old licensing question
Farren,
This discussion comes up a few times a year from new and old alike.
Here is the link to the PVU table from IBM. It changes regularly.
http://www-01.ibm.com/software/lotus/passportadvantage/pvu_licensing_for_customers.html
Sub-capacity licensing is availabl
Farren,
This discussion comes up a few times a year from new and old alike.
Here is the link to the PVU table from IBM. It changes regularly.
http://www-01.ibm.com/software/lotus/passportadvantage/pvu_licensing_for_customers.html
Sub-capacity licensing is available for VMs.
However, if all your
Toll Free: (866) 796-9226
Cell: (314) 750-8721
Original Message
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
From: "Ochs, Duane"
Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 9:07 am
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
We are actually looking into the cost difference.
>From what I unde
We are actually looking into the cost difference.
>From what I understand, IBM is offering both. However, per terabyte licensing
>eliminates sub-capacity licensing.
And it is your entire site. Not just where it works out best.
We are in the midst of passport renewals and found an increa
thread.
My simple question is... how do I find out how much licensing
costs? :-)
I know it's not that simple though.
My basic questions are this...
1) do I need to use the PVU calculations to work out how much a
standard BA client license will cost or can I just pay for a
standard client licen
Hi all
I know I started this in a reply to my backing up of virtual machines bit
thought it best to start a new thread.
My simple question is... how do I find out how much licensing costs? :-)
I know it's not that simple though.
My basic questions are this...
1) do I need to use th
We're in that boat too. We have a GPFS cluster we expect to grow into
the petabyte range, so unless IBM sets the per-byte cost *really* low
we'll get hammered with that licensing scheme.
Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
> Or more costly. We have test VM servers with quad-core processors
Or more costly. We have test VM servers with quad-core processors running
15-VM guests. If I started counting by T-Bytes backed-up, it would cost
a lot more than 4-CPU's!
From:
David Longo
To:
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date:
09/25/2009 03:22 PM
Subject:
Re: [ADSM-L] Per terabyte licensing
I am trying to pin down the rules governing licensing for TSM for
Databases. My best guess, based on unofficial sources and official
but badly written IBM documents, is detailed below.
There are separate license charges for each of the following two things:
1.The right to store data from a
Haven't heard that.
My first thought is that it would make licensing
a LOT easier to figure out!
David Longo
>>> Thomas Denier 9/25/2009 3:09 PM >>>
Within the last few months there was a series of messages on counting
processor cores. A couple of the messages state
Within the last few months there was a series of messages on counting
processor cores. A couple of the messages stated that TSM is moving to
licensing based on terabytes of stored data rather than processor
cores. Where can I find more information on this?
Thanks Christie.
...@gmail.com]
Skickat: den 23 juli 2009 08:53
Till: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Ämne: TSM 6.1 Licensing
Hi,
Is TSM 6.1 similar to 5.5 in licensing? I mean, is it based on tsmbasic.lic
and other .lic files?
Thanks,
Mehdi
Hi,
Is TSM 6.1 similar to 5.5 in licensing? I mean, is it based on tsmbasic.lic
and other .lic files?
Thanks,
Mehdi
On Dec 30, 2008, at 17:33 , Thomas Denier wrote:
My site has a 5.4.2.0 TSM server. We have a number of client systems
using both the backup/archive client and the Oracle variant of TSM
for Databases. We are preparing to move two of these systems to new
hardware with more processors. We will obvi
Yes. Unless you had purchased more licenses than you were using
and have some room there.
David Longo
>>> Thomas Denier 12/30/2008 11:33 AM >>>
My site has a 5.4.2.0 TSM server. We have a number of client systems
using both the backup/archive client and the Oracle variant of TSM
for Databases.
My site has a 5.4.2.0 TSM server. We have a number of client systems
using both the backup/archive client and the Oracle variant of TSM
for Databases. We are preparing to move two of these systems to new
hardware with more processors. We will obviously need licenses for
more processor value units t
The LCM tool is indeed free of charge but only looks at IBM products. There is
"fee/cahrge" product for license management that looks at all vendor software.
The concept of sub-cap pricing is to allow the customer to pay for only those
VM or LPARs software is running on (ie WAS, WebLogic, MQ, Da
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] New Tivoli Licensing Free Metric tool!
Anything 'mandatory' should be built in to the TSM product in my opinion. They
already get a ton of information about the servers so how hard can it be to add
cpu's to the node info.
- Original
>>If this has a heavy enough footprint to not warrant running on a
>>workstation or desktop, theres no way on earth I'd allow it on any of
my
>>servers.
>But didn't somebody say that they heard it was going to be mandatory?
Fortunately, we don't have anything currently that requires this, nor are
---
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Sent: Thu Aug 07 09:48:41 2008
Subject: Re: New Tivoli Licensing Free Metric tool!
If this has a heavy enough footprint to not warrant running on a
workstation or desktop, theres no way on earth I'd allow it on any of
my
Aug 07 09:48:41 2008
Subject: Re: New Tivoli Licensing Free Metric tool!
>If this has a heavy enough footprint to not warrant running on a
>workstation or desktop, theres no way on earth I'd allow it on any of
my
>servers.
But didn't somebody say that they heard it was going to
>If this has a heavy enough footprint to not warrant running on a
>workstation or desktop, theres no way on earth I'd allow it on any of
my
>servers.
But didn't somebody say that they heard it was going to be mandatory?
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intend
bers to equal dollars. This is a
result of their being so obtuse about the licensing for so long.
Since nobody could support the pro-forma regulations with a straight
face, everyone's been WAGging their licensing.
That means that, when they first get automated enforcement in place,
they'll
Well, given this from "IBMSubCap":
"ILMT can only be used to determine the number and types of processor cores for
TSM's PVU-base licensing on the managed servers via a manual effort. In other
words, ILMT won't "see" the TSM code on the TSM managed server, bu
Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Timothy Hughes
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 9:33 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] New Tivoli Licensing Free Metric tool!
Ochs, Duane wrote:
>So when it becomes the standard they can start charg
Licensing Free Metric tool!
Ya I noticed that also when I went to order it in Passport. He-he. If
the software is "free" and "required", why would they care about how
many PVUs it requires?
Maybe with TSM V6 if were lucky you won't need it. :~)
So when it becomes the standard they can start charging for it ;-)
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Allen S. Rout
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 9:13 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: New Tivoli Licensing Free Metric tool
1 - 100 of 410 matches
Mail list logo
