Re: BMC Licensing questions
The paragraph about “bypass or delay” basically states that if you implement some integration (using parallel Remedy forms and workflow, or APIs, or other integration mechanisms) to perform activity that would otherwise require a user license, then the integration itself needs to be implemented in a way that it consumes a user license. Otherwise it would be considered “bypassing” and that’s not allowed. So, for activity that does require a user licenses (mostly individuals updating records), you need to impersonate the real users properly when using APIs, so that user licenses are checked (and reserved, as needed). In such a scenario, you cannot go through a single “integration account”. Please note that in the new Remedy pricing model we also require an ITSM user license for read-only/submit activity within the Remedy ITSM apps. So, read/submit is not always free – it depends on which pricing model your company is using. If you have purchased Remedy using a pricing model that allows free submit of tickets (e.g. incidents), which is the case for the majority of our on-premise customers, then building an integration that only submits tickets can go through an integration account. In that case, a Netcool integration for creating new incidents can go through an integration account. Please remember, Remedy software is only licensed based on users, so I hope it’s understandable that we have some boundaries around “circumventing” the user license mechanism. Overall, Remedy has an extremely attractive and flexible pricing – with many pricing options (concurrent user licenses, perpetual licenses) that other vendors don’t offer. The unit of measure “Per third-party software” is not associated with any of the Remedy product SKUs, as far as I know. You can validate that for the SKUs that are in your contract. So, this part of the EULA is not relevant for your Remedy system. It may apply to other BMC products that you own. The EULA is a document common across all BMC products. Peter From: ARSList on behalf of Joey Neff Reply-To: ARSList Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 11:30 AM To: ARSList Subject: Re: BMC Licensing questions Thanks Dave, but my concern is how to handle updates from external systems rather than simple updates. On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Dave Shellman mailto:adshell...@gmail.com>> wrote: Custom applications can be created with the ability to submit records using a Read license. My guess is that the ITSM Suite is also configured for submitters to create records with a Read license. Dave On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:04 PM Joey Neff mailto:remedy0...@gmail.com>> wrote: From BMC’s End User License Agreement: BMC Remedy Products: Customer man not bypass or delay, in any way, the consumption of a concurrent or named user license to perform and activity that requires a user license (including, without limitation, submitting a ticket to a parallel form and then using workflow to perform and update without a license). Does BMC consider a User license to be an actual person or can the User License represent an external system that interfaces with Remedy? If a user license can represent an interfacing system such as Netcool or an externally customer facing portal, then how does that not violate the above restriction since a single “system” user could be performing updates that represent multiple users in that external system? Under Units of Measure, there is this statement: Per third-party software: A license is required for each installation of the third-party software product that interfaces with the Product. Is this referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy or for those applications developed and registered with BMC by an ISV? If this is referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy, then can it be assumed that if you provide that “user” with a fixed or floating license, that it can perform the same update functions that a person user could? -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org<mailto:ARSList@arslist.org> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org<mailto:ARSList@arslist.org> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
Re: BMC Licensing questions
Is the external system creating the record? That’s the key to the create/modify using a read license. Dave On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:29 PM Joey Neff wrote: > Thanks Dave, but my concern is how to handle updates from external systems > rather than simple updates. > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Dave Shellman > wrote: > >> Custom applications can be created with the ability to submit records >> using a Read license. >> >> My guess is that the ITSM Suite is also configured for submitters to >> create records with a Read license. >> >> Dave >> >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:04 PM Joey Neff wrote: >> >>> From BMC’s End User License Agreement: >>> >>> *BMC Remedy Products*: Customer man not bypass or delay, in any way, >>> the consumption of a concurrent or named user license to perform and >>> activity that requires a user license (including, without limitation, >>> submitting a ticket to a parallel form and then using workflow to perform >>> and update without a license). >>> >>> >>> >>> Does BMC consider a User license to be an actual person or can the User >>> License represent an external system that interfaces with Remedy? >>> >>> If a user license can represent an interfacing system such as Netcool >>> or an externally customer facing portal, then how does that not violate >>> the above restriction since a single “system” user could be performing >>> updates that represent multiple users in that external system? >>> >>> >>> >>> Under Units of Measure, there is this statement: >>> >>> *Per third-party software: *A license is required for each installation >>> of the third-party software product that interfaces with the Product. >>> >>> >>> >>> Is this referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy or for >>> those applications developed and registered with BMC by an ISV? >>> >>> If this is referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy, >>> then can it be assumed that if you provide that “user” with a fixed or >>> floating license, that it can perform the same update functions that a >>> person user could? >>> >>> -- >>> ARSList mailing list >>> ARSList@arslist.org >>> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist >>> >> >> -- >> ARSList mailing list >> ARSList@arslist.org >> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist >> >> > -- > ARSList mailing list > ARSList@arslist.org > https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist > -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
Re: BMC Licensing questions
Updates from an external system requires a service account using a named license to insure that the token is always available. The same account could be used for multiple external sources dependent on the timing of the data transfer. -Original Message- From: Joey Neff To: ARSList Sent: Wed, May 23, 2018 2:29 pm Subject: Re: BMC Licensing questions Thanks Dave, but my concern is how to handle updates from external systems rather than simple updates. On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Dave Shellman wrote: Custom applications can be created with the ability to submit records using a Read license. My guess is that the ITSM Suite is also configured for submitters to create records with a Read license. Dave On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:04 PM Joey Neff wrote: >From BMC’s End User License Agreement: BMCRemedy Products: Customer man not bypass or delay, in any way, the consumption of a concurrentor named user license to perform and activity that requires a user license(including, without limitation, submitting a ticket to a parallel form and thenusing workflow to perform and update without a license). DoesBMC consider a User license to be an actual person or can the User Licenserepresent an external system that interfaces with Remedy? Ifa user license can represent an interfacing systemsuch as Netcool or an externally customer facing portal, then how doesthat not violate the above restriction since a single “system” user could beperforming updates that represent multiple users in that external system? UnderUnits of Measure, there is this statement: Perthird-party software: A license is required for each installation of thethird-party software product that interfaces with the Product. Isthis referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy or for thoseapplications developed and registered with BMC by an ISV? Ifthis is referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy, then can itbe assumed that if you provide that “user” with a fixed or floating license,that it can perform the same update functions that a person user could? -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
Re: BMC Licensing questions
Thanks Dave, but my concern is how to handle updates from external systems rather than simple updates. On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Dave Shellman wrote: > Custom applications can be created with the ability to submit records > using a Read license. > > My guess is that the ITSM Suite is also configured for submitters to > create records with a Read license. > > Dave > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:04 PM Joey Neff wrote: > >> From BMC’s End User License Agreement: >> >> *BMC Remedy Products*: Customer man not bypass or delay, in any way, >> the consumption of a concurrent or named user license to perform and >> activity that requires a user license (including, without limitation, >> submitting a ticket to a parallel form and then using workflow to perform >> and update without a license). >> >> >> >> Does BMC consider a User license to be an actual person or can the User >> License represent an external system that interfaces with Remedy? >> >> If a user license can represent an interfacing system such as Netcool or >> an externally customer facing portal, then how does that not violate the >> above restriction since a single “system” user could be performing updates >> that represent multiple users in that external system? >> >> >> >> Under Units of Measure, there is this statement: >> >> *Per third-party software: *A license is required for each installation >> of the third-party software product that interfaces with the Product. >> >> >> >> Is this referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy or for >> those applications developed and registered with BMC by an ISV? >> >> If this is referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy, then >> can it be assumed that if you provide that “user” with a fixed or floating >> license, that it can perform the same update functions that a person user >> could? >> >> -- >> ARSList mailing list >> ARSList@arslist.org >> https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist >> > > -- > ARSList mailing list > ARSList@arslist.org > https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist > > -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
Re: BMC Licensing questions
Custom applications can be created with the ability to submit records using a Read license. My guess is that the ITSM Suite is also configured for submitters to create records with a Read license. Dave On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:04 PM Joey Neff wrote: > From BMC’s End User License Agreement: > > *BMC Remedy Products*: Customer man not bypass or delay, in any way, the > consumption of a concurrent or named user license to perform and activity > that requires a user license (including, without limitation, submitting a > ticket to a parallel form and then using workflow to perform and update > without a license). > > > > Does BMC consider a User license to be an actual person or can the User > License represent an external system that interfaces with Remedy? > > If a user license can represent an interfacing system such as Netcool or > an externally customer facing portal, then how does that not violate the > above restriction since a single “system” user could be performing updates > that represent multiple users in that external system? > > > > Under Units of Measure, there is this statement: > > *Per third-party software: *A license is required for each installation > of the third-party software product that interfaces with the Product. > > > > Is this referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy or for > those applications developed and registered with BMC by an ISV? > > If this is referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy, then > can it be assumed that if you provide that “user” with a fixed or floating > license, that it can perform the same update functions that a person user > could? > > -- > ARSList mailing list > ARSList@arslist.org > https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist > -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
BMC Licensing questions
>From BMC’s End User License Agreement: *BMC Remedy Products*: Customer man not bypass or delay, in any way, the consumption of a concurrent or named user license to perform and activity that requires a user license (including, without limitation, submitting a ticket to a parallel form and then using workflow to perform and update without a license). Does BMC consider a User license to be an actual person or can the User License represent an external system that interfaces with Remedy? If a user license can represent an interfacing system such as Netcool or an externally customer facing portal, then how does that not violate the above restriction since a single “system” user could be performing updates that represent multiple users in that external system? Under Units of Measure, there is this statement: *Per third-party software: *A license is required for each installation of the third-party software product that interfaces with the Product. Is this referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy or for those applications developed and registered with BMC by an ISV? If this is referring to any external system interfacing with Remedy, then can it be assumed that if you provide that “user” with a fixed or floating license, that it can perform the same update functions that a person user could? -- ARSList mailing list ARSList@arslist.org https://mailman.rrr.se/cgi/listinfo/arslist
