Does PW 32 licensing units have to be same as ASO units?

[Frederick Hoenisch]

Can someone confirm whether or not we must have the same number of PW 32 licenses (for Excursion and PowerTerm) as we do for Advanced Server Server-based licensng PWLMXXXCA07.03?

I seem to recall that that was a requirement regardless of whether or not my users use PowerTerm/Excursion? I can't find that anywhere though.

[Hoff]

You need license each client, yes.

FWIW, PATHWORKS32 is the client package, and Advanced Server is the server package. The current server requires licenses for each client that might access and connect into it.

The PWLMXXXCA07.03 licenses are client licenses.

Here's some reading material that might interest you:

http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731FINAL/6671/6671pro_004.html
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/DOC/73final/6554/6554pro_002.html
http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=952760

The alternative is the CIFS/Samba SMB support that's coming online. There are (were?) field test kits available via the OpenVMS web site.

HP has announced plans for CIFS/Samba for OpenVMS I64, and as an upgrade path for OpenVMS Alpha Advanced Server sites.

[Arch_Muthiah]

if you dont need a license to access PATHWORKS (adv) server, we need PATHWORKS 32 System client license for each client PC.

For server side we need Advanced Server client Access license such as 1/10/25/50 lic pack.

For lice and other details, if you don't have SDP, Please go through this ...
http://h18000.www1.hp.com/info/SP5633/SP5633PF.PDF


Archie

[Hoff]

Here's the CIFS Samba SMB server for OpenVMS:

http://h71000.www7.hp.com/network/CIFS_for_Samba.html

[Brad McCusker · Accepted solution]

>Can someone confirm whether or not we must
>have the same number of PW 32 licenses (for
>Excursion and PowerTerm) as we do for
>Advanced Server Server-based licensng
>PWLMXXXCA07.03?

No, you do not. There is absolutely no relationship between the PW32 licenses and the Advanced Server licenses. They are used for completely different products who just so happen to share a common heritage, but have no current relationship.

>I seem to recall that that was a
>requirement regardless of whether or not my
>users use PowerTerm/Excursion?

You may have had a configuration that was serving client licenses to every client that came up on the network, regardless of whether they were using PowerTerm or eXcursion. That would be a bad configuration.

You may be using DECnet to connect to your file server. If you are, then yes, you need to have a PW32 client license for each client that connects to the Advanced Server. Please understand that the PW32 license also licenses you to use DECnet on the PC, so, you are licensing DECnet, not the Advanced Server. If you were using DECnet for task to task communication (and not using the Advanced Server at all), you would need the PW 32 licenses for each connection.

Also, please understand that there is no requirement to use the Advanced Server's License Server to distribute PW 32 client licenses. As long as you own the correct number of licenses, you can simply shove them in a file cabinet somewhere. The License Server is a conveniet tool for some to manage the client licenses, but, it is not a requirement to use. (Back-in-the-day when I was doing DECUS sessions on PATHWORKS licensing, that was a common recommendation to simplify this whole mess)

Please feel free to ask for more clarification. It's kind of fun to try to clear out the cob webs in my head and remember this stuff ;^)

Brad McCusker

Software Concepts International
www.sciinc.com

[Brad McCusker]

One more point.

If you are using DECnet on the client to access the Advanced Server file shares, you might want to revisit that decision.

As long as you've got a TCP/IP stack on the VMS server and presumably you have TCP/IP on the clients, you probably do not need DECnet on the clients. At the very least, you should take some time to think through whether or not you really need DECnet.

Brad McCusker

Software Concepts International
www.sciinc.com

[Frederick Hoenisch]

My clients aren't using DECNET to access any shares. We only have a very small number of PCs where the PATHWORKS CD software is installed (specifically for excursion & PowerTerm).

I'm just trying to rationalise if we really need the same number of PW 32 licenses as we do Advanced Server licenses.

From what Brad wrote, I'm of the opinion that we can significantly cut down the number of PW 32 licenses (to only those PCs with the software installed) and leave the Advanced Server licenses as is.

Thanks everyone for the feedback. I'm going to take a look at CIFS in the next couple of months to evaluate.

Note: What I'm calling "PW 32 licenses" are part number QM-5LKAA-AB, and what I'm calling "Advanced Server licenses" are QM-5SUAA-AK.