Networker

Re: [Networker] [Net worker] Clients for Unix?

2005-06-10 14:36:07
Subject: Re: [Networker] [Net worker] Clients for Unix?
From: George Sinclair <George.Sinclair AT NOAA DOT GOV>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 14:35:25 -0400
When you say two clients for a single server I assume you mean two nsr
client resources for the same physical host? We do this frequently where
we have multiple client resources for the same IP because they all back up
different savesets using various directives and groups.

I'm still uneasy about this whole "ClientPak for Unix" situation. Still
seems suspect. I don't know what to do because I've already told our
renewal person to add it, and it's taking them forever. Hmm ... maybe
they're dealing with the same questions we've been mulling over? I should
jsut delete the product and see if I can still back up a non Linux Unix
box but I just don't need any mischief right now.

George

> George, you are correct in that "client connections" don't care what
> kind of client they are connecting to as long as you have the correct
> ClientPak.
>
> Speaking of client connections, if you have to create two clients for a
> single server, then that only counts as one (1) of your client
> connections. This happens a lot in the Windows world where you want to
> back up files using a "files" client, and (for example), Exchange using
> the Exchange BSM. It can also happen when you want to back up different
> sets of data at different times.
>
> David
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Legato NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT 
> EDU]
> On Behalf Of George Sinclair
> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 1:50 PM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: [Networker] [Net worker] Clients for Unix?
>
> The case number was 3151068. Apparently, we're all getting different
> answers, but if what you were told is in fact true then that might
> explain why we never see "ClientPak for UNIX" on the maintenance,
> although I have requested that they add it. I only noticed it when I
> desk checked what they had listed for our renewal versus what the
> server's registration window showed, excluding, of course, things like
> updates, etc. Moreover, the fact that you were told this by the
> licensing department has me questioning my previous thinking. As at
> least one person suggested, I could remove the product and then see if I
> can back up a non-Linux box and then re-add as necessary, but I didn't
> feel that adventurous just yet. LOL! Perhaps, though, that will be the
> only way to get absolute resolution on this?
>
> If I misunderstood, or if I was told incorrectly then I hope I'm proven
> wrong because I'd love to save us the money if we don't need that
> clientpak. And, I may be completely wrong. The other thing, though, that
> I had asked about the other day on this news listing was whether or not
> the built-in support for 9 clients was exclusive to those running the
> same OS as the server. I think we all concur that it is not exclusive
> and will work for all Unix clients as long as the clientpak situation is
> copacetic.
>
> George
>
>> George,
>>
>> Would you be willing to provide the case number for this call?  I was
>> told this morning by someone in Legato licensing that non-Linux UNIX
>> is non-Linux UNIX.  In other words, in your scenario 2 I would not
>> need a ClientPak for UNIX.  I was told that this has been the case
>> since v6.x.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Teresa
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: George Sinclair [mailto:George.Sinclair AT noaa DOT gov]
>> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 11:39 AM
>> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU; Teresa Biehler
>> Subject: Re: [Networker] ClientPak for Unix?
>>
>> Thanks to all who responded. Since I started all this mischief, I felt
>> compelled to at least investigate and report back. I opened a case
>> with Legato concerning this matter, and several other things, too.
>> Here's what
>> technical support told me in regards to this matter.
>>
>> 1. To be clear, all versions of the NetWorker product come with
>> built-in support for 10 clients; the base enabler for the product
>> always gives you
>> 9 more beyond how ever many client connection licenses you have,
>> although
>> I suppose it would be 10 if you chose not to back up the server! That
>> means, 1 for the NetWorker server itself and the remaining 9 for any
>> other
>> 9 clients you choose to back up regardless of their OS. So, unless you
>> are
>> backing up more than 9 clients you would never need to add any
>> additional
>> client connection licenses. Okay, I guess we all know this much, and I
>> suspect most of us are backing up 10 or more clients.
>>
>> 2. If all the clients are running the same OS as the server then there
>> is
>> no need to add any clientpaks like "ClientPak for Unix", "ClientPak
>> for Linux" or "ClientPak for Windows".
>>
>> 3. The equation changes, though, as soon as you want to back up a
>> client whose OS is different than the server's. If the given client is
>> an NT or windows box then you would need the "ClientPak for Windows",
>> unless the server is also running Windows. If the affected client is a
>> Linux box then
>> you'd need the "ClientPak for Linux" unless the server is running
>> Linux. And if the client was a "non-Linux" Unix box then you'd need
>> the "ClientPak for Unix" unless the server is also running that same
>> Unix OS,
>> e.g. HP-UX, IRIX, Solaris, etc. It MUST be the same!
>>
>> 4. The built-in support for 9 additional clients (beyond the server
>> itself; server makes 10) extends to whatever OS those clients are
>> running
>> as long as the conditions in item 3 are met. So it's *NOT* the case
>> that the built-in support is ALWAYS limited to clients running the
>> same OS as the server. By default, yes, but once a required clientpak
>> is added, no.
>>
>> So, a few scenarios:
>>
>> Scenario 1: I have a server running Solaris, and I only want to back
>> up the server and 9 or fewer Solaris clients. I would *not* need any
>> client connection licenses, and I would *not* need a ClientPak for
>> Unix. However,
>> as soon as I add 10 or more Solaris clients, I would then need a
>> client connection license (typically qty=5).
>>
>> Scenario 2: I have a Solaris server, but I want to back up at least 1
>> AIX,
>> IRIX or HP-UX box or any combination but not more than 9, and I also
>> want
>> to  back up the server. Again, I will *not* need any client connection
>> licenses, but I *WILL* need a "ClientPak for Unix" since I'll be
>> backing up at least one non-Solaris Unix client. And as soon as I go
>> to the 10th client, then and only then will I need to add client
>> connection
>> license(s).
>>
>> Scenario 3: I have a IRIX server, and I want to back up the server, at
>> least one NT machine, one linux box, and I also want to back up at
>> least eleven IRIX clients, for a minimum of server+1+1+11=14 machines.
>> I will need "ClientPak for Windows", "ClientPak for Linux" and at
>> least one Client Connections license to handle the additional 4
>> machines since built-in support only covers 10 machines (9 clients
>> plus server).
>>
>> I don't know if Legato sells individual client connection licenses
>> since all of ours are "Client Connections/5" or "Client
>> Connections/25".
>>
>> Also, I do not know what happens if you're server say is running
>> RedHat Linux and you want to back up at least one non-RedHat Linux
>> machine like Debian or BSD, etc. I suspect that you would not require
>> the "ClientPak for Linux" but did not confirm.
>>
>> George
>>
>>> I emailed questions about the ClientPAK for UNIX, ClientPAK for PC
>>> desktops and ClientPAK for Windows to the resellers that we generally
>>> work with.  I got three different answers about what we needed for
>>> our environment!
>>>
>>> I'll also be asking more questions and trying to speak with someone
>>> to get a definite answer.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> Teresa
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Legato NetWorker discussion
>> [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU]
>>> On Behalf Of Roberta Butcher Gold
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 4:42 PM
>>> To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
>>> Subject: Re: [Networker] ClientPak for Unix?
>>>
>>> I received an email from someone on this list indicating that our
>> Sales
>>> Rep and EMC/Legato licensing department states that we DO need
>>> "Clientpak for Unix" if our unix client is running a different flavor
>>> of unix than the server! Sigh ...
>>>
>>> Anyway, I sent email to our PSAM to get to the bottom of this ...
>>> stay posted.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Dave Mussulman wrote:
>>>>>It's important to audit these things.  On our last renewal, they
>>>>> end-of-lifed / recycled our 'ClientPak for PC Desktops' into a
>>>>>'ClientPak for Windows' license, but didn't take the old license off
>>> the
>>>>>quote.
>>>>>Worse than that, we already had a ClientPak for Windows NT which
>>>>> sufficed for the 'ClientPak for Windows' license.  So they charged
>> for
>>>>> the ClientPak for PC Desktops, the ClientPak for Windows they added
>> to
>>>>> replace the PC Desktops, and the original ClientPak for Windows NT
>> --
>>>>> billing us three times for something we only needed one of.
>> Adjusting
>>>>> the quote lowered the cost by almost $1000.
>>>>>
>>>>>I assume it's implied that if the Networker server is running on
>>> Linux,
>>>>>then the ClientPak for UNIX is required to backup Solaris/AIX/HPUX,
>>>>> and you don't need a ClientPak for Linux to backup linux clients?
>>>>>
>>>>The ClientPaks are only needed for platforms that are different.  So,
>>>> this would include a need for a Linux ClientPak if your server  is
>>>> different than Linux.
>>>>
>>>>As you stated above, the world of Legato licensing is an ever
>>>>changing "exciting" world.  :)
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 10:55:12AM -0700, Roberta Butcher Gold
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>We are preparing to renew our licenses also, and being a customer
>> of
>>>>>> NetWorker since 4.0, I was under the impression we still needed  a
>>>>>> "Clientpak for Unix" license if the clients were a different
>> flavor
>>>>>> of Unix than our server ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Many thanks to you George for asking the question!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Straight from Legato:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>FR: ysong
>>>>>>
>>>>>>3151114 Licensing Issues
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Roberta,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If my server is a Unix (AIX) machine, do I need a "Clientpak for
>>>
>>>>>>>Unix" to back up my Solaris, SGIs, and Digital Unix clients?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you have enough client connections, then you don't need any
>>>>>> clientpak for unix as your NW server is of unix platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The only situation where you would need one is that , your NW
>>>>>> backup server is Windows platform, then in that case you need a
>>>>>> clientpak for Unix.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The only exception is Linux clients,  you need a linux clientpak
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> your NW server is either Window or Unix.  We treat linux more
>>>>>> like
>> a
>>>>>> module.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In summary , you don't need a separate  clientpak for unix.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yung Song
>>>>>>Legato Technical Support
>>>>>>EMC Software Group
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>At 9:45 AM -0400 6/8/05, George Sinclair wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm sure this question has been dealt with before, but I'm in a
>> rush
>>> to
>>>>>>>get an answer and have not been able to get any clear answers or
>>> return
>>>>>>>calls from Legato, and we have support; otherwise, I'd talk to
>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>> about this and not waste anyone's time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We have a Solaris server running NetWork Edition. We have *always*
>>> had
>>>>>>>the "ClientPak for UNIX" as one of our products as shown in the
>>> server
>>>>>>>registration window. My understanding is that in order to support
>>>>>>> different flavors of Unix, other than the server's (in this case
>>>>>>> Solaris), this is a necessary product, or at least it was at one
>>> time.
>>>>>>>We do back up other flavors of Unix, including Linux; however, in
>>> the
>>>>>>>case of Linux, we also have the required "ClientPak for Linux",
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> because we also back up Windows machines, we also have the
>>> "Clientpak
>>>>>>>for Windows".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Questions:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>1. Does the built-in support for 10 clients (server and 9 other
>>> clients)
>>>>>>>that you always get with NetWorker extend to all non-Linux flavors
>>> of
>>>>>>>Unix as long as you have the "ClientPak for Unix"? In other words,
>>> in
>>>>>>>our case, if we had no other "NetWorker client connections", would
>>> we
>>>>>>>still be able to back up 9 AIX boxes, or 9 SGI boxes, or any
>>>>>>> combination, etc. assuming the server was Solaris, or does the
>>> built-in
>>>>>>>support only allow for 9 Solaris clients (server makes 10)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>2. If we we're only backing up Solaris clients, would the
>> "ClientPak
>>> for
>>>>>>>Unix" be necessary?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>2. What would happen if we removed the "ClientPak for Unix"? We're
>>> still
>>>>>>>running 6.1.1, but not sure if later updates obviated the need for
>>> this
>>>>>>>product? We're getting ready to renew our maintenance and needed
>>>>>>> to
>>> know
>>>>>>>if this should definitely be included.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>George
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>--
>>>>>>>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command
>>>>>>> via
>>> email
>>>>>>>to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>>>>>>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>>>>>>> also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this
>>> list
>>>>>>>should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>>>>>>>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>Roberta Butcher Gold
>>>>>>Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
>>>>>>ICC/HPSD - Security Technologies Group
>>>>>>gold11 AT llnl DOT gov
>>>>>>(925) 422-0167
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
>>> email
>>>>>>to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>>>>>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>> also
>>>>>> view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this
>>> list
>>>>>>should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>>>>>>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
>>> email
>>>>>to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>>>>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
>>>>> also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this
>>>>> list should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>>>>>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
>>> email
>>>>to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>>>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can also
>>>> view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
>>>> should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>>>>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Roberta Butcher Gold
>>> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
>>> ICC/HPSD - Security Technologies Group
>>> gold11 AT llnl DOT gov
>>> (925) 422-0167
>>>
>>> --
>>> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
>>> email
>>> to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can also
>>> view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
>>> should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>>> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>>>
>>> --
>>> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
>>> email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can also
>>> view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
>>> should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>>> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>>
>> --
>> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
>> email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
>> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can also
>> view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
>> should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
>> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>
> --
> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
> email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
> also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
> should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>
> --
> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via
> email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
> http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
> also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
> should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list. Questions regarding this list
should be sent to stan AT temple DOT edu
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>