[THIN] Re: MPS 3.0 licensing issue
- From: "Ron Oglesby" <Roglesby@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 14:33:32 -0500
Yeah. Since the new license files are tied to the hostname of the License
server you are tight. BUT since the new liceses also allow for the LIC
server to be down for 30 days you have no problems with one site being down.
A good way to do this is to setup the license server and keep a standby (in
the assumption that to recover you may have lost the primary site
permanently, like from a low yield tactical nuke or something) Anyway, The
MF server will notice that the license server is gone. They will then be
able to use ALL the licenses for 30 days, plenty of time to recover from
pretty much anything.
Ron
_____
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jonathan Kadoo
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 2:29 PM
To: Thinlist
Subject: [THIN] MPS 3.0 licensing issue
I am working on an issue with our upgrade to mps 3.0. We have two offices
with a dedicated link between them. We are debating on how to setup our
licensing. What we want to accomplish is to have our licenses shared
between both offices. So if one office goes down the other will still have
the use of all the licenses.
I have been doing a lot of reading about how the new licensing works and I
don't really see a way of accomplishing this. The only options I can see is
to have one server in one office and have everyone in both offices share the
licenses from that server. Or have two servers one in each office and split
our total licenses between both offices. Am I missing something here? Is
there no way we can share the licenses without having just one server in one
office?
Thanks
Jonathan
Other related posts:
