[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference iosg::all-in-1_v30

Title:*OLD* ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference
Notice:Closed - See Note 4331.l to move to IOSG::ALL-IN-1
Moderator:IOSG::PYE
Created:Thu Jan 30 1992
Last Modified:Tue Jan 23 1996
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:4343
Total number of notes:18308

1686.0. "Personal Use Licence/Message Rtr" by SUBURB::PEGGV () Thu Oct 29 1992 15:53

    We have a customer who wants a Message Router Personal Use Licence. 
    This does not exist, so he is considering buying an ALL-IN-1 IOS
    Personal Use licence for the Message Router component.  We realise he
    will need to purchase and install ALL-IN-1 media.  Are there any
    pitfalls in this?  Is it ethical?
    
    Your views would be appreciated.
    
    Valerie Pegg
    DECdirect Tech Support
    
    cross posted in SW_Licensing
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name		DateLines
1686.1BRUMMY::MARTIN::BELLMartin Bell, TCC, Birmingham UKThu Oct 29 1992 16:4525
We had a similar situation with one of our customers who bought ALL-IN-1
for only one node in the cluster, but due to "limitations" of DDS, this
had to run cluster-wide (see note 711.*).

Now the ALL-IN-1 installation procedure loads "zillion point" PAKs for
for its component products (i.e. Message Router), thus from a technical
point of view it is all correct.

Unfortunately from a non-technical point of view, it was escalated up
to European level (4 months ago) and we still have heard nothing!!!

Now what _you_ are proposing seems more legal than what we were doing, even
if they do not propose to use ALL-IN-1 PL.

Why do they want Personal Use Message Router anyway - the product is
useless without a user agent, and all our user agents come with a Message
Router licence bundled in?

IMHO, they should not even have to fully install ALL-IN-1 PL on each node,
as they just have to load the ALL-IN-1 PAK and perform an install up to
the "load licence" bit - a licence does not legally force you to install
the software!


mb
1686.2License ? What License ?UTRTSC::SCHOLLAERTBP: *S*ervices, *S*ervices, *S*ervicesFri Oct 30 1992 07:5629
>Why do they want Personal Use Message Router anyway - the product is
>useless without a user agent, and all our user agents come with a Message
>Router licence bundled in?
    
    Isn't this the reason that Message Router version 3.2 only needs a
    DECnet license and no license of its own ?
    
    < STARS V2.5-5/TIMA Query  - For help press HELP or PF2 >
    [MR V3.2 RN] 3 New Features; 3.2 Message Router Licensing Change              
                                                                                  
    PRODUCT/COMPONENT:         Message Router V3.2                                
                                                                                  
    EXTRACT FROM DOCUMENT:    "VAX Message Router Release Notes V3.2"             
                                                                                  
    Publication Date:          OCTOBER 1991                                       
                                                                                  
            3 New Features                                                        
                                                                                  
            3.2 Message Router Licensing Change                                   
                                                                                  
                  Message Router Version 3.2 checks for the DECnet license.       
                  Message Router no longer has its own Product
    Authorization      
                  Key (PAK).                                                      
                                                                                  
                  See the Message Router Installation Guide for details of        
                  the implications of this licensing change.
1686.3Licencing it with DECnet kinda makes sense!BRUMMY::MARTIN::BELLMartin Bell, TCC, Birmingham UKFri Oct 30 1992 08:4811
Re: .2

I remember reading in the MAILBUS conference about MR just checking for
a DECnet licence, but i though that was just "convenience" rather than
a legal definition.

I suppose we really have to wait for a response from SW_LICENSING, Valerie,
can copy any relevant replies in here. I will rattle a few cages over here
to see where the European Level escalation got to!

mb