On 02/11/11 22:36, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> On 11/02/2011 06:34 AM, Ned Slider wrote:
>> On 01/11/11 22:26, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>>>
>>> Just to be sure does that mean that for $2000 I can install on one physical
>>> system and unlimited guests on that system or does that mean the $2000 are
>>> only for the host system with the *ability* to host an unlimited number of
>>> guests and I still have to buy a subscription for each individual guest on
>>> top of that?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>
>> All I can tell you is that our virtualization licenses allow you to
>> install on 1 host (up to 2 sockets), and on *that* one host you can then
>> install as many RHEL guests as you like and they will all be entitled to
>> updates through RHN without consuming any further entitlements. So
>> unlimited entitled RHEL guests.
>
> Is that the $2000 license or how much do you pay for that? I'm trying to
> understand if the costs of licensing RHEL are actually feasible for and
> right now I'm a bit perplexed that their licensing isn't all that clear.
> If the license indeed includes the entitlements for RHEL guests on that
> host then this actually looks manageable but if you have to pony up more
> on top of that for each VM then something like debian looks indeed more
> attractive.
>
Sorry Dennis, I can't personally confirm that as licenses aren't paid
out of my pocket, but it looks like Trey has already confirmed it for you.
I would very much suggest you give Red Hat sales a ring or drop them an
email.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
