We are on SLM 9.2.
Some days later we noticed that our compliance reports or also the license tracking per computer report do not show any license requirement for our WIndows Servers any more. The license requirements for all these applications is 0.
I'm not sure if it is caused by SLM 9.2 or if it was perhaps caused by SRS updates for all Windows Server applications on 30. April 2019
Has anybody else noticed that issue?
Hi Carola,
This seems to be a problem related to SLM 9.2
We are struggling with that since our upgrade a couple of months ago.
For reference, we have a ticket open: CS0042300
This is particularly annoying since random applications stop being properly detected. Even metering of detected applications seems to be wrong in at least 2 detected instances in our environment.
This also affects pre-recognized applications and as a result, our use of the XML connector becomes useless.
Hi Samuel
Thanks for your answer.
I did not notice that problem before. Meanwhile i also created a ticket for that issue.
I will update this thread, when i have more info.
But you mentioned detection and metering problems.
In our case detection looks good. I can see the Windows Server installation for our servers, but the compliance report do not show a license requirement, while there is a requirement.
Oh I see, sorry.
Could it be linked to the new way SLM handles virtual servers now?
The requirement is correctly set to 0 and the real requirement is reflected only on the host.
This is documented here in this blog from Ana Marquez under the section "What about the VMs?".
Hi Carola,
If these are VM's, it could be that the VM's are already covered by the host i.e. fully licensed host or that the VM's are not linked to a host. It is all to do with the new way that Snow handles compliance for VM.
ana.marquez - can you confirm this?
Regards,
Mike
hi carola.iberl
It is correct as mike.rossouw said that VMs' license requirement will look different in 9.2 since the compliance calculation has been changed to represent how Windows Server licensing rules actually are.
But what you describe does not sound just related to VMs? Not sure, but anyway, you have reported another issue related to an error in your compliance log that I think may affect the results you get for Windows Server license requirements directly. There is a fix for that error that will come out in 9.2.1.
cheers
Ana
Hi All,
Many thanks for your comments
The reason for that problem don't is the new "Licensed by host". When we check our compliance report then there are only 0 values for license quantity, license requirement, coverage, and so on for all our Windows Server applications in all companies.
That's for all Windows servers, at least the physical machines should create a requirement.
We meanwhile found, that this behaviour is really an issue in SLM 9.2, compliance calculation throw error messages.
Today I got 9.2.1 as beta and with that version this problem seems to be solved.
But it's interesting, that it seems to be only an issue for us.
oh! I did not get your answer before I clicked to send mine .... great to hear that it works in 9.2.1. you are an excellent Beta tester
thanks!
Hi all,
With SLM 9.2.1 this issue is solved.
With this change to no longer show the license requirement at a VM level, we have found that we cannot assign licenses or reflect compliance of VMs in Azure. It seems the Unknown Physical Host flag is stopping this from working. But in Azure you don't need to license the physical host and you have the ability to license the VM with Hybrid Use Benefit. How can this be handled?
Hi Josh,
I don't currently have an exact answer for this great question, however, I am aware that it is with the R&D team at the moment and is being planned for development into SLM. I am also not sure of the planned timescales for this. ana.marquez, can you validate and provide any clarity to Josh?
Thanks and Regards,
Mike
on May 7, 2019
Hi all,
With SLM 9.2.1 this issue is solved.