From: case@b11.ingr.com (Bill Case)
Subject: Re: I/License
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 22:39:43 GMT

In article <tdenbo.702832866@guru>, tdenbo@dwp.la.ca.us (Tom Denbo) writes:

> 
> Reply-To: rob@panache.b17a.ingr.com
> In article <tdenbo.702832866@guru>, tdenbo@dwp.la.ca.us (Tom Denbo) writes:
> |> Last IGUG in the presentation on the the forth coming license server, 
> |> a lot of flexibility was promised.  It was said that the license server
> |> would be giving warnings only for the first year, for instance.

Tom,

I'd rather this subject be discussed in depth, with Q&A, at Spring IGUG
(it will be), but I'll try to allay fears that some juggernaut is headed
your way in a "matter of days."

Intergraph still plans for a phased introduction of licensing.  In fact,
rather than an immediate  Monitor/warning  mode, the licensing system is 
delivered in the OFF mode in ISS 6.0/6.1 except for user-logins.  There will 
then be a Monitor/warning phase which you refer to.  So in general, schedules
have been stretched instead of compressed and an additional "phase" of
introduction has been added.   Only after these two phases will licensing 
be turned on.  I personally know of no other licensing system which has 
been introduced in such a phased manner.

You're right about the login issue being somewhat of a departure from
previous plans, but the login issue was not associated with licensing
until after the IGUG you refer to.  The decision  to use licensing in ISS 
6.x for user logins was based on  several considerations:

	o the C4 systems needed support for 2, 8, 16....login increments.

	o the development groups wanted only one login image to support
	  (not one image that ran 2 logins, and another which ran unlimited,
	   and another which.....)

	o the login case was the simplest to administer.  In fact, for
	  the customer, administration basically ends once the login license 
	  has been added to the node.

	o the login case would begin to exercise the infrastructure needed 
	  to support licensing.

	o the login case fit our model for a phased introduction.


>  I've
> just received a noticed dated 3/23/92 to 'Dear Intergraph Customer'.
> The decription of the license server system in this document is much
> more restrictive and complex than what was presented at IGUG.
> 
> 	Now we'll have 60 days grace period not 1 year.  

It is delivered in ON mode only for logins.  The "grace"
period is 90 days for multi-user logins.  During this 90 days, all
2000 and 6000-series systems will output warning-only messages.  In ISS 6.x,
the login code on 2000 and 6000-series systems depends on a node-locked
license to know how many users may login.  Intergraph does not have the 
necessary machine information which is needed  to create these node_locked 
licenses.  The letter referred to is asking for this information so that 
Intergraph may provide a valid license.

It is the intent to use 1992 as a beta-test period for normal licensing
(License Servers, application licensing, etc).  Selected customers have 
been contacted for participation in this program. If you would like to 
be considered for beta-test participation, please  contact you Intergraph 
representative.

> Now we'll have
> 	to worry about;
> 	
> 	whether we've got a 2, 8, 16, or unlimited user license;  

I believe all previous systems except 2020's were shipped as unlimited use 
systems.   2020's were sold as two-user systems with an option to purchase 
the multi-user product SS**190 which allowed unlimited logins.  The 8, 16...
incremental logins are only on the new C4-based systems.  Since all new 
systems will be shipped with the correct login license installed, the issue
is restricted to machine id's of 6000 and 2000 series machines in the field
which are running unlimited logins.
> 	
> 	whether we have a product with a floating license or one tied to
> 	a specific machine;

The login licenses are always node_locked and a License Server is not
required.

> 	
> 	getting temporary keys when 'node-locked' license must be moved
> 	to another machine due to a failure;
> 	
> 	getting temporary keys when the license server goes down;

Again, this is not an issue with node_locked licenses or multi-user
login licenses.  Once the login license is installed, there is basically no
administration.

> 	
> 	extra administration of license servers. 

This will only be an issue when licensing is ON for applications and floating 
licenses are in use.   The ON mode is not scheduled until after an adequate
beta test phase.  The advantages of floating licenses require  administration 
of a License Server.  Node_locked licenses are less complex but less flexible.  

> 	
> Plus we will be forced to use the new release that adds all this
> overhead (6.0).
> 
> With this kind of customer abuse Ingr wouldn't remain number one in
> customer satisfaction! 

A great deal of effort has been put forth to minimize the impact on the
customer.  The I/License system attempts to be tolerant of occasional 
problems and tries to minimize  intrusion.  These topics will be discussed 
at Spring IGUG.  We will also be very attentive to comments from beta test.

Very few people like Licensing, but the use of distributed processing
requires some method of accounting for use, but also provides opportunities
for more cost effective use of software products.  Customer satisfaction
is very important to Intergraph, and a long development cycle has been
undertaken to create a licensing environment which we hope will satisfy 
the customer.

I hope this helps.  I believe the discussions at IGUG will clarify any
misunderstandings.

Bill Case

--