T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
606.1 | See OpenVMS SPD... | XDELTA::HOFFMAN | Steve, OpenVMS Engineering | Thu May 15 1997 17:18 | 29 |
|
This customer appears to be in violation of licensing. From the SPD:
--
4. OpenVMS VAX Distributed Interactive User License
(QL-09SA*-**)
LMF Product Name: ADL-USER
This license grants the right to interactive use of the OpenVMS VAX
operating system, provided the appropriate Operating System Base Li-
cense or one of the five types of VAX VMS Licenses has been previously
installed on a VAX system. The Distributed Interactive User licenses
are concurrent use licenses and are available in any quantity, except
unlimited. Distributed Interactive User licenses are mobile (redes-
ignatable) and may be installed and used on a single OpenVMS VAX pro-
cessor or shared in a single OpenVMS VAXcluster.
A distributed interactive user is defined as an individual who is logged
in to an OpenVMS VAX processor or OpenVMS VAXcluster system or is in-
teractively using the operating system, software by means other than
a login.
This license grants the right to use the same version of the operat-
ing system software as permitted for the corresponding Operating Sys-
tem Base License at the time when the User License is installed.
|
606.2 | True...according to the SPD | CSC32::G_BURTT | | Fri May 16 1997 12:23 | 8 |
| I agree that he appears to be in violation according to the SPD. He received
this system about a year ago, this was the license that was delivered with it on
the dec number, and it has worked. So I take it referring him to his contract
administrator and or the Licensing Admin group (CSLA) would be the appropriate
action? Do you know if the LMF Group tables will be changed in a future release
to not allow this license to work on the ALPHA platform?
Gary Burtt
|
606.3 | Contact a PM -- see note 7.* | XDELTA::HOFFMAN | Steve, OpenVMS Engineering | Fri May 16 1997 12:29 | 6 |
|
You will want to talk with the OpenVMS product managers directly, as
you're heading out of the technical area and into the licensing and
futures area. This might be a bug in the SPD, or it might be a PAK
error, or it might be residual organizational weirdness.
|
606.4 | this is daveM's baby | STAR::ABIS | I come in peace | Fri May 16 1997 18:32 | 6 |
| Gary,
Talk to Dave Maryanski (star::maryanski). I'll bet that that SPD is wrong and
the customer is legal.
Eric
|