We just connected our first ePMP AP up to the flexible licensing server. This AP is brand-new and has 0 associations. We have 100 licenses assigned to our company at this time. When the AP connected to the licensing server, it reported that there were 99 available.
When I go to the support site and navigate to Company to look at license use, it shows 1 SM has claimed a license, and the MAC address of the SM matches the MAC address of the ***access point***.
Is this a bug? APs should not be claiming 1 SM license from the flexible pool for themselves, right?
-- Nathan
EDIT: in case it is relevant, I should mention we loaded 3.5.2-RC15 on this AP and it is talking to the licensing server through a web proxy.
The AP does consume a license when it connects to the license server, but it accounts for that when SMs connect. If you have a single SM connected, it will still consume 1 license. When you have 2 SMs connected, it will consume 2 licenses, and so on.
Thanks; it is good to know that this is actually intentional behavior. Though I'm not sure how big of a deal it will actually be to us in practice yet, my first reaction is that I'm not sure I like or agree with this behavior: seems to me that APs should only consume a license when that license can be matched up with an Elevated SM.
For example, I imagine that many providers will want to keep configurations of infrastructure uniform across their network. I know we do: APs are deployed cookie-cutter as much as possible so that behavior is uniform and there are no unexpected surprises for installers (e.g., only APs X and Y can accept Elevated SMs, but Z cannot, etc.). What this means is that we are surely going to configure *all* of our ePMP APs to talk to the licensing server, regardless of whether we know it is likely to service Elevated clients or not. Let's say we light up 30 ePMP sectors, only 10 of which have at least one Elevated SM on them. That's a waste of 20 licenses, which seems...well, stupid, to be quite frank and honest... 😕
It's more of a misunderstanding when the feature was implemented than it is intentional behaviour. We already have a ticket open to fix it, but I can't give you an exact date or version number yet.
It's more of a misunderstanding when the feature was implemented than it is intentional behaviour. We already have a ticket open to fix it, but I can't give you an exact date or version number yet.
I'm having the same problem, some news for correction in the count of the licenses Flexible?
Groups of APs sharing 60 Flexible licenses, in this scenario noticed another problem, when a client is connected for example in AP "A", when pointing and connecting the same client to AP "B". What is this if it is the data storage system for all customers?
You may also get a problem in counting / updating the licenses, for example in an AP with 29 Elevate clients connected, by restarting the consuming software 58 Licenses Raise, that is, double the consumption of licenses because it has not released / made available as units when the clients disconnected when performing the Restart.
IMPORTANT: At no point does AP lose communication with the Internet or Cloud of Cambium!
What are the policy update and accounting times?
Are they serious, what is your proposal for a solution or guidance to overcome these problems?