One of the enhancements in ILMT/BigFix V9.2.8, is supposed to be around shared disk, NSF drives
We believe this can cause ILMT to over report software deployment. A simplified example below the highlights the question which we would like answered by IBM.
But the reality is based on dozens of AIX Servers where we are planning to deploy NSF (Network Storage Feature). This can cause a significant concern with the accuracy of our ILMT reports. Our goal is to remain compliant with IBM, and accurately track IBM software where NSFs are deployed. I’d like to get feedback from the ITAM Review community.
<><><> Simplified Example <><><>
Server 1 is an AIX LPAR with 3 virtual storage disks. It is 200 PVUs at subcap, and contains the required ILMT agent.
Disk 1 has IBM WAS code and other software such as the software needed for the web app as well as other data needed by the company.
Disk 2 has a web app that uses WAS.
Disk 3 has no IBM software
Server 2 is an AIX LPAR with 3 virtual storage disks. It is 400 PVUs at subcap and contains an ILMT agent.
Disk 4 has unrelated software needed for the healthcare app that uses no IBM software
Disk 5 has no IBM software
Disk 6 has no IBM software
Case 1 : No NSF deployed
Server 1 is an LPAR with 200 PVUs. ILMT correctly reports 200 PVUs for WAS deployment.
Server 2 is an LPAR with 400 PVUs. ILMT correctly reports zero WAS deployment.
Case 2: NSF deployed
Customer adds NSF on Server 1 , to disk 1. Now Server 2 can see disk 1.
The workloads do not change on Server 2 , and Server 2 does not use WAS but now has access to WAS via the shared NSF.
Server 1 continues to correctly report 200 PVUs of IBM WAS deployment.
Server 2 now reports 400 PVUs of WAS in ILMT.
ILMT is now showing 600 PVUs of WAS deployed in the environment.
Focusing on Case 2 after deploying NSF:
We know licensing is not based on use, it is based on Install. ILMT is reporting an aggregate deployment of 600 PVUs across Server 1 and Server 2 due to NSF deployment.
Does Server 2 require 400 PVUs of WAS in case 2? That is the main question.
If Server 2 does not require an IBM WAS license, what is the ideal way to resolve this double counting?
Is it to not consider NSF in ILMT?
Or is it to consider NSF and then manually exclude WAS from Server 2 ?
is there a preferred method that IBM recommends that will pass the audit sniff test?