Solved: Prime Infrastructure licensing question

Boris Uskov · ‎02-16-2016

Hello, team!

I am trying to deal with new software and licensing approach from cisco - Cisco ONE.

Could someone, please, check if I make a correct comparison between Cisco ONE order and A-la-carte order?

I'm going to order five switches C2960X-24TS-L and Prime Infrastructure to manage them.

For A-la-carte order I made the following specification. Please, see the attach "2960 alacarte PRIME".

For Cisco ONE order I made the following specification. Please, see the attach "2960 cisco ONE PRIME.xls".

The Estimate Total is significally lower for Cisco ONE order, so I'd like to check if I'm missing something?

Is it true that with Cisco ONE approach I don't need to order Lifecycle and Assurance licenses for Cisco Prime anymore since they both included into Cisco ONE Foundation Perpetual for every 2960 switch?

Marvin Rhoads · ‎02-16-2016

The comparisons only make sense to the Cisco accountants - you know "there's no such thing a a free lunch" (Tanstaafl!). At the end of the day, the new model results in more revenue for Cisco.

Your a la carte option required purchase of the smallest increment - 25 licenses. The Cisco One option was a single license per device and you have 5 each devices.

Also, very few customers ever purchased the Assurance license types. Of those who did, even fewer actually used them from what I've seen. Of those who used them, even fewer are happy with it. With Cisco One, you pay for the license, albeit at small incremental cost per device, whether or not you use it.

Also I have yet to see how the new licensing will work - are they smart licenses with Prime calling back to a portal constantly to make sure you're in compliance? Do I get a PAK with every single switch? How much is it going to take to administer all of that? What happens when there's a mismatch between what a customer purchased and what Cisco's licensing system thinks they have (i.e. administrative mixup)?

Color me skeptical.

View solution in original post

Marvin Rhoads · ‎02-16-2016

The comparisons only make sense to the Cisco accountants - you know "there's no such thing a a free lunch" (Tanstaafl!). At the end of the day, the new model results in more revenue for Cisco.

Your a la carte option required purchase of the smallest increment - 25 licenses. The Cisco One option was a single license per device and you have 5 each devices.

Also, very few customers ever purchased the Assurance license types. Of those who did, even fewer actually used them from what I've seen. Of those who used them, even fewer are happy with it. With Cisco One, you pay for the license, albeit at small incremental cost per device, whether or not you use it.

Also I have yet to see how the new licensing will work - are they smart licenses with Prime calling back to a portal constantly to make sure you're in compliance? Do I get a PAK with every single switch? How much is it going to take to administer all of that? What happens when there's a mismatch between what a customer purchased and what Cisco's licensing system thinks they have (i.e. administrative mixup)?

Color me skeptical.

Boris Uskov · ‎02-17-2016

Hello, Marvin!

Many thanks for sharing your thoughts!