New Veeam Linux Appliance only supporting VUL

[mkretzer]

Hello all,

we just found out that the new Linux Appliance only supports VUL and no Socket licenses. For us this is a huge issue and i don't see the reason for this decision (what does the type of installation have to do with how licenses are counted)?

I know that this is not directly an R&D issue but maybe others use this forum as one of their main sources of Veeam info like me.
So if this is also an issue for your environment then talk to your Veeam sales and explain why this is an issue .

It would be bad if V13 gets released and then a mob of angry customers flood the forum. Now there might be a chance that Veeam reconsiders the decision.

Markus

[Gostev]

You're right, R&D doesn't decide on licensing so this forum is a wrong place to discuss related topics.

I can only share my technical perspective of someone responsible for the implementation. Despite Socket licenses were discontinued many years ago, business requested that I keep maintaining support of existing licenses in VBR on Windows to ensure that customers who bought this offering with perpetual Socket licenses are able to continue using the exact software they purchased in perpetuity. For me it means continuous overhead of supporting two completely different licensing schemes but alas.

However, literally NO new product or offering I shipped in the past 10 years supported Socket licenses. So having to implement support for Socket licensing for this particular new offering after a decade without Sockets would seem... strange to say the least.

And no, you will see that Software Appliance is not "the same V13 software just installed on a different OS". It's a completely new experience, even if the backup engine is shared. Just because it's an appliance, it has many inherent features and benefits that are exclusive to this new offering. Because unlike with installable software, with Software Appliance we're responsible for everything.

[mkretzer]

Is there a "licensing forum" to discuss this?
Also, there are still some products offer CPU - Proxmox as an example. Also, core licensing is used by a lot of solutions and it would very likely work for us.

I just do not understand the direct correlation. If V13 still supports CPU sockets on windows it should do so as well on linux.

[vmexpert]

mkretzer but what's the big deal? When you migrate to VUL you continue paying same as your pay for your Sockets license renewal today. Migration is painless and you even get 20% in-product buffer on top of your issued VULs count to accommodate for future expansion and for any temp consumption spikes.

[Gostev]

Is there a "licensing forum" to discuss this?

Not in this community. Here we are only able to discuss technical questions around how business rules are implemented in our products (e.g. how license enforcement works). But not the actual business rules, because R&D doesn't decide on them. So any such discussions become nothing but a massive distraction, cause we still need to follow and moderate them. While the only possible outcome is elevated blood pressure for all participants and us

Plus it depends who you want to discuss this with. If you're thinking there's a community where our Pricing & Packaging folks talk directly to end users then no, they don't operate this way. This is a unique experience you only get with Veeam R&D. AFAIK our Pricing & Packaging team does market research by sending targeted polls and talking directly to larger customers.

In any case, since every customer's situation and requirements are different, as always the best approach for any pricing and licensing queries/concerns is to reach out to your Veeam sales rep. They are also able to pass any feedback you might have to the Sales leadership, who are a stakeholder in Pricing & Packaging decisions.

Also, there are still some products offer CPU - Proxmox as an example. Also, core licensing is used by a lot of solutions and it would very likely work for us.

Backing up Proxmox with Veeam also requires VUL. And by the way, I was not exaggerating when I said it's been over a decade since we did not support Sockets for any new products and offerings for on-prem.

[mkretzer]

mkretzer but what's the big deal? When you migrate to VUL you continue paying same as your pay for your Sockets license renewal today. Migration is painless and you even get 20% in-product buffer on top of your issued VULs count to accommodate for future expansion and for any temp consumption spikes.

Is that so? Last time we checked going to VUL meant we pay much, much more than before because we do 10-20 times the number of VMs the normal customer does per CPU.

[Gostev]

As far as I know yes, and moreover these migration rules have been in place for a few years now. But you're also right that they were different when VUL was first introduced, and kept changing often until business finally landed on what actually worked for customers.

[mkretzer]

Ok. I will try again.
Will the reduced price from the migration carry over to future support extensions?

[Gostev]

I like to think so but unfortunately I know little to nothing about the migration program specifics.
Just ask for a quote and this should have all caveats like that documented, if they even exist.

[mkretzer]

Will do, thank you very much. I will update this thread one last time with the results so there is one more positive thread about VUL

[Gostev]

Quoting what I was able to find out:
"Yes the discounted pricing carries over into future years, and price indexing aligns with Subscription index rates instead of the higher Socket index rates".

So your software renewal price grows about 2x faster today while you stay on Sockets, comparing to migrating to VUL. Because Socket license price, which serves as the base for renewal price, goes up on average 10% every year, while VUL only 5% on average (close to inflation).

[mkretzer]

Ok, I talked to Veeam sales. They checked our VMC.log and they immediately told me the VUL pricing is working for customers which have 5-10 VM per socket (or core?) and not so much for our size/efficiency.
So the old problems do not seem to be solved... Lets see which price we get.

[Gostev]

Their comment makes zero sense to me. But again, I don't know all the details of the migration policy.

[mkretzer]

The thing is: if what they say is true not much has changed. Or we need to escalate it to someone else (whoever this might be).
I was at the Veeam Usergroup meeting where we got that information and the whole room was "slightly irritated" (to say the least) about this. So its not just us!

[Gostev]

Googling for "veeam socket to vul conversion" returns pretty unambigious results, like this post from Reddit:

So every year, Veeam want to convert our legacy sockets into VULs. It's always the same price "We look at your current VM count and give you the VULs for the same cost as what your paying for sockets"

[mkretzer]

Strange that sales does not know about this. I will keep you updated...

[Gostev]

Ah. The actual migrations offers are handled by Renewals department, so if you're talking to your Sales person than they indeed may not be aware.

[janezk]

Hi,

the problem is that VUL may NEVER equally replace socket licenses. And this is somehow a technical issue. The big main difference is that socket licenses are static and well known in advance. I buy one server with 2 sockets and all the software for it. And I excactly know that I'm covered. This is the on-prem logic. The cloud logic does not function for on-prem! Even Broadcom realized that, the VMWare push to cloud was an error and now they are re-focusing for on-prem. With the VUL licenses I alway get the same question: How many workloads (VM-s,...) will you have or you need? Sorry sales folks, I'm not a fortune teller with a big glass ball! I can't predict the future and also I can't buy every few weeks/months new additional VUL licenses. The only viable solution is to have the eg. 3 preferably 5 year contract and then to pay for actual past use on a monthly/yearly basis as for an electricity bill. If you have an isolated environment, things complicate even more... The decision to stop support of perpetual licenses is good only for those excel oriented shareholders, that do not consider that happy users are the hart of the profit.
For me as a tecnical guy the license issues present a very technical problem on how to make sure we cover all the workloads we have.

BR
Janez

[Gostev]

Technical correction: with VUL you don't have to "predict the future and also buy additional VUL every few weeks/months" because the product itself gives you up to 20% buffer to use on top of the licenced VUL amount.

Since despite my ask above this discussion is turning into a general VUL licensing feedback thread, I'm locking it for now to prevent further off-topic until OP is ready to post his conclusion.

[Gostev]

Sharing the Sockets to VUL Migration Policy confirmation directly from our Pricing & Packaging folks.

Code: Select all

STD  Sockets to VUL migration: AR + 6%
ENT  Sockets to VUL migration: AR + 3%
ENT+ Sockets to VUL migration: AR

AR = current Annual Renewal price of your Socket license

If you see any differences:
- Make sure you're not comparing your current VUL migration quote to a 3-5 years old Socket renewal price (Veeam indexes MSRP annually, and Renewal price is a percent of current MSRP)
- Make sure you did not receive a discretionary discount on your previous renewal