Conference azur::mcc

�    ... used in special marketing campaigns also make very difficult 
�    to sell package like SMS or products left out of such package 
�    (Ethernim).


    Ethernim is included in both DECmcc SMS and DECmcc EMS packaged
    products.
    
    �hR.

    Yes, you are right, but..
    
    What I meant is that the license price of Ethernim (or upgrade 
    to SMS) is getting too high when TSM, RBMS and LTM has been sold 
    earlier with considerable discounts (selling at MLP $ price means 
    practically of 1/2 local price).
 
    If no local policy exists for discounting upgrade packages,
    the upgrade RBMS-LTM-TSM  could be up to 3-4 times MLP $ price
    for Ethernim. Simple solution would be discounting also 
    Ethernim + using the price list 1$ RBMS-LTM-TSM-ETHERNIM SMS 
    upgrade!
    
    But the orginal question can be also presented: If customer
    would buy SMS (or EMS) license now, what she/he can expect to get more
    on top of DECmcc/BMS in 1-2 years, when current NM products are
    obsolete?
    
    Olli                              
    

    this question has been passed along to Daniel Holland for a reply.
    

    I'll simplify the question a bit:
    
    How can be SMS and EMS future versions (V2.0 and later) be sold
    to customer who is interested of DECmcc (Director, BMS)?
    
    Will current extra functionality provided today by point ('DECmcc 
    family') products be in future add-on capability to BMS?
    
    Today Bridge AM is part of V1.0 BMS.
    
    Will full Ethernim functionality and TSM functionality be separately
    sold products (AM/FMs) to replace point products?
    Similar situation with NMCC/DECnet Monitor functionality - will it
    be excluded from BMS and sold separately?
    
    (BMS price is today about 50% of SMS and 25-30% of EMS)
     
    Olli
                                           

In an effort to clarify MES/SMS/BMS we need a precise list of functions
being replace in BMS.   For example, BMS contains access to Phase IV
entities and appears to replace NCP ... but not completely as no X.25 or SNA
fucntions of NCP exist.   BMS station access does not fully replace TLM/Ethernim.
BMS alarms does not fully replace NMCC alarms.   We need a statement 
about replacement functionality (if you did xyz with LTM do abc with BMS)
and a schedule of when full replacement (and additional functions) is
achieved. 

/Claudia

>   For example, BMS contains access to Phase IV entities and appears to
>   replace NCP ... but not completely as no X.25 or SNA fucntions of NCP
>   exist.
    
    SNA functions of NCP????   This is news to me (I work in the IBM
    Interconnect group).  You can manage the DECnet aspects of and
    DECnet/SNA Gateway from NCP and that's it.
    
    Jon.            

                <<< TOOK::WORK$214:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MCC.NOTE;2 >>>
                     -< Intros in Note 6; Kits in Note 3 >-
================================================================================
Note 407.4                       EMS, SMS, BMS ?                          4 of 6
EEMELI::VALTONEN "Ken is in heaven, or not?"         19 lines   5-NOV-1990 03:26
                     -< Packaging causes still confusing >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I'll simplify the question a bit:
    
    How can be SMS and EMS future versions (V2.0 and later) be sold
    to customer who is interested of DECmcc (Director, BMS)?
>    
> We have firts of all to keep in mind that the DECmcc SMS/EMS package
    were originally our transition offering from the Point Product 
    towards an EMA-Compliant offer.  What have started with the V2.*
    is the integration of the DECmcc DECnet Fault Diag. Ass within the
    package , and as you know this FM will be available as a seperate
    asynchronous MM (It has it's own Part Number QL-YSXA9-AA).
    So over time SMS and EMS will have more and more MM , like 
    when you buy a car you have different version with more and more 
    option included . Which option will be included is analysed right now.
    >
    >
    
        Will current extra functionality provided today by point ('DECmcc 
    family') products be in future add-on capability to BMS?
    
    Today Bridge AM is part of V1.0 BMS.
    
    Will full Ethernim functionality and TSM functionality be separately
    sold products (AM/FMs) to replace point products?
    Similar situation with NMCC/DECnet Monitor functionality - will it
    be excluded from BMS and sold separately?
    <
    < Once again this will be a case by case study , I personnaly regarding
    < TS AM would like it to be included in DECmcc BMS AND be available 
    < as a asynchronous AM (like the TSP/IP SNMP AM).
    <  The business reason behind is that we have lot's of customer who have
    < just TSM  (that cost them around 3000 $ MLP ), as the DECmcc Director
    < is bundled with DECnet , they could so just  add this TS AM. Of 
    < course we have to make sure that the features provided by this TS AM 
    < are covering the main features of the TSM .
    < I assume that for the other Point Product it might be more difficult
    < as they might indeed take into actions more MM (as End to End Traffic
    < Monitor , Station AM  etc ).
    >   
    (BMS price is today about 50% of SMS and 25-30% of EMS)
     
    
    Olli
                                           
                <<< TOOK::WORK$214:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MCC.NOTE;2 >>>
                     -< Intros in Note 6; Kits in Note 3 >-
================================================================================
Note 407.5                       EMS, SMS, BMS ?                          5 of 6
CLAUDI::PETERS                                       10 lines   5-NOV-1990 09:54
         -< need a list of AMs and what  point products they replace >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an effort to clarify MES/SMS/BMS we need a precise list of functions
being replace in BMS.   For example, BMS contains access to Phase IV
entities and appears to replace NCP ... but not completely as no X.25 or SNA
fucntions of NCP exist.   BMS station access does not fully replace TLM/Ethernim.
BMS alarms does not fully replace NMCC alarms.   We need a statement 
about replacement functionality (if you did xyz with LTM do abc with BMS)
and a schedule of when full replacement (and additional functions) is
achieved. 

    < Please we have enough confusion with the names of the packages , so 
    < try not to type errors in your text . on your msg you talk about
    < MES , I assume it's EMS , same for TLM regarding LTM.
    < The statement of the replacement of the PP is something that
    < is worked on right now .
    <
    < Regards .
    < 
    < Marc 
/Claudia

    Thanks Marc,                                 
    
    I think you are now on right track.
    
    Adding FDA to SMS/EMS V2.0 keeps especially SMS as viable offer.
    In similar way adding Performance analysis tools can keep EMS
    as preferred packege for large corporate customers.
    
    Idea of having TSM as separately sold AM maybe useful for upgrade
    customers with smaller sites (no bridges or only a few).
    
    Idea of having Director with Phase IV functionality as replacement
    to NCP (part of the functionality) helps also surely the ramp up
    the sales - customers can practise with MCC as soon VMS V5.4-1 is
    available. 
    This will help selling BMS V1.1 in Q3/Q4 and with different (local?) 
    campaigns existing RBMS (and TSM) customers can be more easily 
    converted to DECmcc.
    
    Just one request: I haven't seen yet SMS/EMS V2.0 SPDs - when will 
    these be ready ? 
    WE NEED UP-TO-DATE DESCRIPTIONS OF DIFFERENT PACKAGES - preferably
    3 - 6 months before shipping  - it will increase Sales figures 
    for all these packages and turn also SMS/EMS real NM platforms.
    
    Olli  

    Please see note #426 for the DECmcc SMS/EMS V2.0 SPDs/SSAs.  I
    just checked VTX; the V2.0 SPDs are not yet available from VTX.
    
    Lisa

    Hi,
    
    I understand the messages in .7 however I feel the message regarding
    added value of buying EMS/SMS needs to be made clear to the customer. 
    Until now the message has been easy - Buy SMS/EMS and we (Digital) will
    manage your transition path to EMA.
    
    Now EMA has started to arrive and with BMS around, already containing a
    Bridge AM, customers are questioning the value of buying EMS/SMS, as it
    only includes some non EMA layered products which will go away anyway.
    
    The message that the extra functionality of SMS/EMS (particularly that
    associated with LTM, Ethernim and DECnet Monitor) will be maintained in
    the future, by the inclusion of more MMs, needs to be clearly made in
    Marketing literature, so justifying the extra cost of SMS/EMS. If not
    they will just buy BMS and consider MMs as layered products as they
    become available.
    
    From Marc's statement about DECnet Fault Diagnosis being included in
    version 2 of SMS/EMS and not in BMS, this is clearly what is intended
    to be done, however this needs to be stated clearly as in my experiance
    customers find the current options confusing now that BMS has arrived.
    Also, the likes of me (specialists in the field) need to be confident
    about this also when we persuade them to go for SMS/EMS.
    
    Regards,
    
    Dave