Content Management and Capture

 View Only

  • 1.  Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Wed January 03, 2024 08:48 AM

    Hi,

    a customer is moving from FileNet Content Manager AUVU based licensing to CP4BA capacity licensing. We, IBM and other involved partners are going in cercles to answer the question if cores for ICN also have to be licensed. The LI (license information) that I'm able to find on the IBM site(s) indicate to that not, but nobody involved seems to have a definite answer that he/she can back up with corresponding documents.

    MY understanding is, that ICN is an addon to other software (FileNet Content manager in this case) and as long as you use the 'source' software according to the license (AND ICN only with CPE) you are good to go.

    Right? Wrong? A little bit correct?

    Happy new year,

    Gerold



    ------------------------------
    Gerold Krommer
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Thu January 04, 2024 03:26 AM

    Hi Gerold,

    The IBMers have a XLS sheet "Managing License Entitlements - CP4BA" which is used to calculate the required VPC for CP4BA. There you find a statement, that for Kubernetes deployments you do not need to count the ICN cores, but for traditional deployments you need to. You can find the sheet in Seismic.

    I hope that clarifies.

    Regards,

    Roland



    ------------------------------
    Roland Merkt
    Sr Manager EIM
    CENIT
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Thu January 04, 2024 03:33 AM

    Hi Gerold, the answer will depend on the FileNet version that is deployed (there are differences in LI between 5.5.8 and e.g. 5.5.12 when it comes to whether ICN is listed as part of the "Components Not Used for Establishing Required Entitlements" , and the form factor (Traditional deployment, Container deployment, or deployment as an CP4BA pattern).

    I'm not proficient on giving the answer, but the answer will depend on these additional information. Could you please add?



    ------------------------------
    Mathias Korell
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Thu January 04, 2024 09:01 AM

    So looking quickly, it looks like the LI Doc for FNCM changed with 5.5.11

    • 5.5.10 document: "Licensee may install and use the following Program components, under the license terms, but these components are not used to determine the number of entitlements required for the Program. IBM Db2 Standard Edition, IBM Daeja ViewONE Virtual, IBM Daeja ViewONE Professional"
    • 5.5.11 document: "Licensee may install and use the following Program components, under the license terms, but these components are not used to determine the number of entitlements required for the Program. IBM Db2 Standard Edition, IBM Daeja ViewONE Virtual, IBM Daeja ViewONE Professional, IBM Content Navigator"

    Basically, the entitlement to use FNCM in Traditional Deployments and non-CP4BA Container Deployments under the CP4BA license has always been:

    1. CP4BA VPCs per Core ratio follows CP4BA LI Doc
    2. Which Cores to count follows FNCM LI Doc

    And for CP4BA Container Deployments everything has been per the CP4BA LI Doc exclusively.

    So, if you're deploying FNCM v5.5.10 or older, and it's not a cloud pak deployment, you probably need to count ICN. If you're upgraded to 5.5.11 or 5.5.12, you probably don't need to count it.

    But @LAUREN Mayes or @MATT Vest probably need to give a definitive answer here.



    ------------------------------
    Eric Walk
    Director

    O: 617-453-9983 | NASDAQ: PRFT | Perficient.com
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 5.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Mon January 08, 2024 07:44 AM

    Hi all,

    thnaks for your answers, they are correct and led me to the correct conclusions.

    As a side note: Customer wanted to save on VPCs and wanted to run ICN on containers and CPE traditional... it is not supported (although it would escape me why)

    Thanks again,

    /Gerold



    ------------------------------
    Gerold Krommer
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 6.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Mon January 08, 2024 07:51 AM

    Hi Gerold, great news, thanks for sharing! 

    Regarding  "ICN on containers and CPE traditional... it is not supported (although it would escape me why)": ICN talks to CPE using different transports (EJB on traditional deployment, vs Web Service transport on container deployment); therefore this cannot be mixed.



    ------------------------------
    Mathias Korell
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 7.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Mon January 08, 2024 08:03 AM
    The WSI transport that container ICN uses is available on traditional CPE. It used to be that you needed to manually set some special jvm parameters on the traditional CPE to make it work, and manually federating LTPA was a pain. They may have just decided it wasn't worth it to certify and document, even though it technically works. It's been years since I've tried it, though, it's possible the code bases have started to diverge now. Meaningful divergence in the code bases is something I've been anticipating for a good long while now, it'd be interesting if it's starting (I've always expected Java version to be the thing that'll drive; the divergence in turn will drive the eventual desynchronization or total end of feature updates for traditional deploy).

    Best,
    Eric

    Eric Walk

    Director

     |   NASDAQ: PRFT   |    Perficient.com

    What about the data?





    Original Message


  • 8.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Mon January 08, 2024 08:16 AM

    Hi Eric,

    I do completely concur with your analysis. I'd go even further... traditional might NEVER be ported/qualified on Java Version > 8. Therefore when Java 8 support will end in 2030 , traditional installations will not be supported any more.

    Note: This is my private hallucination and is therefore in no way connected to IBM and certainly not an IBM statement IN ANY WAY.

    /Gerold 



    ------------------------------
    Gerold Krommer
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 9.  RE: Simple (yet not safely answered) CP4BA Licensing Question

    Posted Mon January 08, 2024 08:09 AM

    Mathias,

    as Eric said WSI transport for traditional is supported for a while now.



    ------------------------------
    Gerold Krommer
    ------------------------------

    Original Message