Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mailrus!ames!haven!mimsy!mojo!SYSMGR@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: License Management Facility (LMF)
Message-ID: <0093531F.3C9A4060@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>
Date: 14 Apr 90 18:52:00 GMT
References: <10142@shlump.nac.dec.com> <00934FDA.44D76CA0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>,<JKLH2S1@drivax.UUCP>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (The News System)
Reply-To: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 28

In article <JKLH2S1@drivax.UUCP>, braun@drivax.UUCP (Kral) writes:
>
>From a user perspective, I don't mind LMF.  Here's why: Clustering technology
>makes it real easy for sites to breach their CPU licenses.  No copy necessary,
>you just execute from shared disks on multiple CPUs, all for a single CPU
>price.  If your vendor finds out, you suddenly owe them (potentially) a lot of
>money.  And it's real easy to accidentally get setup this way.

For what products? LMF is used (mostly) for DEC products in the VMS world and
soon to be inflicted on ULTRIX. If I run an ultrix cluster of 24 machines, 
I'm going to have to type in 24 LMF packs, and activate them for all 24
CPUS. ANNOYING.

If you purchase 24 machines, but only one "right to upgrade", the vendor
is going to come talk with you real quick.

>Other programs may prevent this by checking CPU serial IDs.  Do you consider
>this a " lack of fundmental [sic] trust at some level"?

It depends on how this process is implemented, but we're talking about the
OPERATING SYSTEM here, bunkie! You only have one (or two) sources to get
that from, and few sources of support. 

For applications, I have no problem at all at going to fetch the CPU serial
number. I do have a problem with companies OTD (other than Digital) which
do MORE inane things, such as have me type in a 40 line by 60 character matrix
of coded random lettering in order to get the product to work across our
VAXcluster, instead of supplying it on a TK-50 or floppy disk....