This document discusses licensing challenges posed by virtualization technologies and FlexNet Publisher's approaches to addressing them. It begins by outlining the types of virtualization and how they can impact licensing. It then lists questions software producers must answer regarding virtualization and licensing. Next, it summarizes the results of a survey of software producers on their virtualization policies and compliance quantification. The document concludes by describing FlexNet Publisher's virtualization roadmap, which allows producers to establish enforcement strategies based on trust levels and includes options like binding licenses to virtual machine containers or physical hardware.

1. W H I T E PA P E R
Virtualization & FlexNet Publisher

2. Virtualization & FlexNet Publisher
Introduction Questions Software Producers Must Answer
Almost all software licensing models eventually require Based upon two Flexera Software-hosted virtualization
either one license or a pool of licenses to be bound to a summits, participating customers recognize their
particular machine. While this was answered over the years organizations must answer some the following questions:
for physical machines, some virtualization technologies are 1. ave we defined a virtualization policy and has this
H
posing new challenges for software producers to enforce their policy been communicated to our customers? Can
license agreements using traditional licensing models. we use the same policy as we do for the physical
hardware environment?
Various analyst white papers purport that server virtualization
has moved past the early adopter stage to that of strategic 2. ow many of our customers are using virtualization
H
virtualization. For example, Forrester reports the adoption of today? Is there a compliance problem and can it be
server virtualization in enterprise IT will reach 65% by 2009 quantified? What virtual platforms are our customers
with 45% of x86 servers virtualized.1 This means software using and in combination with what OS platforms?
producers must develop and communicate licensing policies 3. re there new markets available because of
A
that take into account their license server and applications virtualization (e.g., time rental via SaaS)?
will run on virtual machines. It also means that FlexNet
4. hat specific problem do we want to solve (e.g.,
W
Publisher must provide the appropriate enforcement and
Piracy, compliance, or both). Are we concerned with
reporting tools to allow the software producer and their
intentional vs. unintentional overuse?
enterprise customers to confidently operate in this new
virtual environment. 5. hould pricing be based on physical or virtual
S
resources (sub-capacity pricing)?
Flexera Software research indicates that most software 6. hould alternate pricing models be defined to license
S
producers have not modified their license policies to deal in virtual environments? Should we charge more based
with virtualization. Longer term it is recognized that new upon the additional virtualization test matrix involved?
usage based ways to monetize software must be considered. Is there a market to charge less for limited capability?
However, in the short term existing hardware centric licensing
models must be applied to virtual platforms.
The results of a limited virtualization survey conducted
This document describes how FlexNet Publisher will enable during one of the aforementioned virtualization summits are
the software producer to embrace virtualization by providing summarized below.
various means to enforce licensing on virtual machines.
This paper describes approaches and technologies
available today as well as those that are being considered in
the future.
1
A
s reported in the FORRESTER white paper entitled “x86 Virtualization Adopters Hit the Tipping
Point,” November 30, 2007
2 Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series

3. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
As can be seen from these tables, most of the software producers surveyed indicate their organizations have not defined
and communicated their virtualization policy. While most have not quantified a specific compliance problem around
virtualization, it is recognized the potential for overuse is there and must be solved. Finally, most customers intend to
initially apply traditional licensing and pricing models to virtual environments.
Survey Results
Question 1: Has your company defined and communicated your virtualization policy? % of Votes
Yes 21%
We are in process of creating a policy, but it is not complete. 21%
We have not started on a virtualization policy. 42%
I don’t know. 14%
Question 2: Have you quantified a compliance problem around virtualization? % of Votes
We have quantified a compliance problem and need to solve this problem. 20%
We have not quantified a compliance problem, but we want the ability to enforce 60%
our license policies in virtual environments.
We don’t care about enforcing or monitoring compliance around virtualization. 6%
I don’t have an opinion at this time. 13%
Question 3: Have you defined new ways to monetize your software around % of Votes
virtualization?
No, we will use existing licensing and pricing models. 64%
No, but we have started to discuss this. 14%
Yes, we have defined new models to better match our software usage within virtual 7%
environments.
I don’t know. 14%
Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series 3

4. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
Types of Virtualization Technologies Remote Control
The most commonly known virtualization technology is (Also known as KVM over IP) – One person can control the
virtual machine technology. However, there are other types. host computer at any one time. The keyboard and mouse
Here is a partial inventory of those types, the vendors who connected to the host computer and to each of the guest
supply the technology, and a summary of the software computers can be active simultaneously and thus compete
licensing issues. to be the source of input. Keystroke and mouse events from
these different input sources can be interleaved. Also, the
Virtual Machines video of each computer displays the same single desktop.
With virtual machine technologies, each operating system Therefore, these solutions are not intended for multiple guest
instance on a physical machine is made to believe it’s the computers to share the resources of the host computer at the
only operating system running on that physical machine. same time.
These technologies do this by virtualizing (abstracting)
the machine’s hardware components, one virtual machine Remote control solutions do not represent a security
instance per operating system instance. vulnerability to license management systems. The ability
to remotely control a host computer does not enable a
Application Virtualization / Application Isolation dishonest user to run more instances of licensed software
With application isolation technologies, each application than they could already run if they were using the KVM
instance running on an operating system instance is made attached to the host computer. Therefore, this document will
to believe it’s the only application running on that operating not further discuss remote control technologies.
system. These technologies do this by virtualizing the
operating system’s file system (and registry on Windows), The remainder of the document will describe Flexera
one virtual file system (and registry) instance per application Software’s approach to providing our software producer
instance. Some application isolation technologies also customers the tools necessary to deal with licensing within
isolate the operating system’s global namespace, so objects virtual machine (server virtualization) environments using
like semaphores are not shared between application FlexNet Publisher.
instances. All other operating system services are shared
between isolated and non-isolated application instance.
Terminal Services
With terminal services, one terminal server machine
supports multiple user sessions. Each user session
encapsulates the desktop environment of one remotely
logged-in user. Each user is made to believe they are the
only user on that machine.
Virtualization Technology Vendor/Products Software Licensing Issue?
Virtual Machines VMware: Workstation, ESX; Affects licensing
Microsoft: Hyper-V, Virtual PC/Server;
Citrix: Xen Server, Desktop;
Parallels: Desktop and Server (Mac), Server
(Linux), Workstation (Windows and Linux);
Sun: Zones;
IBM pSeries: LPARs;
HP: VPars, Integrity
Application Virtualization Microsoft: App-V; Affects licensing
VMware: ThinApp;
Terminal Services Microsoft: Terminal Server; Affects licensing
Citrix: Presentation Server;
Sun: Secure Global Desktop
Remote Control GoToMyPC, PCAnyWhere, VNC No affect on licensing
Figure 1: Partial List of Virtualization Technologies
4 Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series

5. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
Compliance and Piracy Challenges of Virtualization challenges and approaches to mitigate this risk. Our
Software producers’ licensing policies and approaches customers tell us that they want to apply traditional license
range from compliance for trusted customers to enforcement models to virtual environments. This approach is important
for markets that pose more risk of intentional overuse or in order to maintain backward compatibility with legacy
outright piracy. Traditional licensing models that bind the clients deployed at many end user locations.
license server or application to the physical machine have
worked well over the years. As software producers know, The challenge for Flexera Software and FlexNet Publisher
any software license can be exploited by a determined is there is no universal method to detect and interface with
hacker. However, traditional license enforcement the multitude of virtualization platforms available today.
technologies, design practices, and processes do a good To resolve this challenge, Flexera Software has engaged
job at keeping honest customers honest and to discourage in dialogs with multiple virtualization vendors to define a
the casual exploiter. supported interface method between FlexNet Publisher and
their platforms.
Virtualization technologies have changed this landscape
by making it very easy to create multiple virtual machines Flexera Software has also developed a Virtualization API
on a single physical machine. While the advantages of specification in collaboration with several virtualization
machine virtualization are obvious and enticing for the vendors. This standard will provide a uniform interface
enterprise customer, this technology poses challenges for method that will allow FlexNet Publisher to more rapidly
the software producer using traditional license enforcement. support those virtualization platforms that adopt this
This is because virtual machines can be configured to have standard. Other vendors have developed their own
the same attributes (e.g., MAC address, port number, IP API’s and architectures to accomplish this interface
address, etc.) that match an existing license file. While the (although with varying degrees of complexity, effectiveness,
risk is low for widespread piracy of a licensed application, and overhead).
there is potential high risk of the license server being
replicated on many virtual machines making available many Flexera Software’s Approach to Virtualization
more entitlements than were purchased. This situation is Flexera Software’s virtualization roadmap for FlexNet
depicted in Figure 2 below. Publisher enables the software producer to establish an
enforcement strategy based upon the level of trust they have
with their customers. The trust range is graphically shown
License Server License Server
Bound to Physical Bound to Virtual Figure 3 below.
Hardware is Hardware is
Hard to Replicate Easy to Replicate
STRONG WEAK NONE
Guest OS
Operating System
VM Hypervisor
Guest OS
Permission: Allow Permission: Allow Permission: Prohibit
LICENSE
SERVER Binding: VM Container Binding: Physical Binding: N/A
Guest OS
LICENSE
SERVER Report: Log File Report: Log File Report: N/A
Figure 3: Range of Trust between Software Producers and
their Markets
For markets or customers where no trust exists, the publisher
can detect the presence of virtual machines and decide
Guest
Gues
Gue t OS
Guest O
ue not to allow the license server to run or not to issue a
Guest OS
Guest OS
st
t LC
LIC N
LICENSE
CEN
Guest OS LC
LIC N
LICENSE
CEN
SERVER
SE V
ERV
E
SERVER
SE V
ERV
E
license to an application that is installed on a virtual
LICENSE
SERVER
machine. Referring to the above diagram, permission to
run on a virtual machine (VM) would be denied, therefore,
no binding and reporting would come into play. This
Figure 2: License Server Instances Bound to Physical or approach is perhaps the safest for the producer and may be
Virtual Hardware
justified for risky markets. However, the reality of enterprise
Over the past several years, Flexera Software has virtualization and the affect on customer satisfaction that
collaborated with many software producer customers as may result must also be considered.
well as virtualization vendors about license enforcement
Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series 5

6. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
For markets or customers where strong trust exists, the Care is taken such that false positives are not generated for
publisher can first detect the presence of a virtual machine virtual machine detection, while at the same time ensuring
and then bind the license server to the Universal Unique these techniques are not easily defeated. Once the software
Identifier (UUID) of the VM container. Likewise, the license identifies that it is being run on a virtual machine, the
file for an application can also be bound to the UUID of software producer can implement within their software an
a particular VM container. While it is true that UUID’s can appropriate action based on a defined virtualization policy.
be replicated and applied to additional virtual machines Some of the business policies that can be enforced include
(either on the same or on different physical machines), the ability to:
virtualization management software is almost always present
(such as VMware’s vCenter) that will detect this condition 1. efuse to start the license server in a virtual
R
and issue system errors until this situation is corrected. In environment.
this scenario, permission to run on a VM is granted but VM 2. efuse to enable a particular feature of the
R
container binding is also enforced to increase confidence application in a virtual environment.
that license entitlements are not replicated on additional 3. estrict a software feature to be functional only in a
R
virtual machines. With this approach, the end user of virtual environment.
the license can take full advantage of the advanced VM
functionalities like high-availability and fault tolerance, since The following segment describes some use cases where the
the licenses can be moved from one physical machine to virtual machine detection capabilities can be useful and
another without failure. The FlexNet Publisher report log the FlexNet Publisher syntax needed to implement the
contains both virtual and physical platform data and license desired capability:
checkout denial information.
1. oftware Producer A deploys only a served licensing
S
For those markets and customers deemed to be in the model. They market low-volume, high-cost software
middle of the trust range, the publisher can detect the and both casual and intentional piracy is a big
presence of a virtual machine and then bind to a physical concern for them. They do not want their license
hardware element (or combination of elements) of the host server to be deployed in a virtual machine due to the
machine (e.g., MAC address). Included in binding is a ease with which this can lead to license over usage.
mutex locking mechanism to ensure the license server is not They will instead require their customers to locate their
copied and able to issue licenses from a second VM on the license server on a physical machine within the
same hardware platform. In this scenario, permission to run data center.
on a VM is granted but physical binding is also required
to increase confidence that license entitlements are not • his is implemented by the software publisher by
T
replicated. The report log will contain virtual and physical setting a compile time switch within the license
platform data and license checkout denial information. server customization code. Specifically, within
This approach is more secure than VM container binding, the file lsvendor.c the following variable setting
but will not support use cases such as high-availability or is made and the license server is built:
fail-over where the VM will move from one physical server
to another. FLEX_VM_TYPE ls_allow_vm = PHYSICAL; /* Restrict
VD to a physical m/c only */
The software producer must first answer some of the
questions presented at the beginning of this paper to 2. oftware producer B deploys both served and
S
quantify the problems they want to address and then unserved licensing models. Certain features of their
determine the appropriate license enforcement response for application cannot run on virtual machines (e.g.,
the markets and customers they serve. they require connecting a measurement instrument
using a USB port that is not supported on a virtual
License Enforcement Using Virtual Machine Detection platform). They would like to disable these features on
FlexNet Publisher offers license enforcement options based virtual machines while at the same time allowing the
on virtual machine detection. This release incorporates a other product features to function on both virtual and
number of published techniques to identify virtual machine physical platforms.
platforms to allow the FlexNet Publisher vendor daemons
and FLEX-enabled applications to identify if they are being • his is implemented by the software publisher by
T
run on a virtual machine. While the techniques implemented using the license file keyword VM_PLATFORMS
allow the detection of a number of different virtual machine on the FEATURE line as shown below:
platforms, this release specifically supports the VMware ESX
Server and Workstation products. FEATURE measure_voltage admld 2.5 01-jan-2012
4
VM_PLATFORMS=PHYSICAL SIGN=”00E3 ……”
6 Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series

7. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
3. oftware producer C deploys their software primarily
S Over usage can still happen if multiple instances of a virtual
using the unserved, node-locked license model. They machine, running on the same physical machine, are used
are concerned about software piracy, particularly with to run the license server. To eliminate this condition, a
their non-enterprise users and would like to restrict facility that will enforce a mutex lock is needed so only one
their software to physical hardware. However, they instance of a license server (of one software producer) is
do want to support certain trusted enterprise customers being run on a given physical machine.
who want to use their software on virtual machine
instances. In short, they want to control the ability of FlexNet Publisher v11.8 will provide both bare metal
their software to function on a virtual machine (or not) binding and mutex locking. These two technologies are
via the license file. depicted in the solutions shown in figure 4.
• This is implemented by the software publisher by
This approach provides advantages to both the software
using the license file keyword VM_PLATFORMS producer and their enterprise customers. The software
on the FEATURE line as shown below and producer has reasonable assurance of a relatively secure
granting these licenses on a case-by-case basis: licensing solution, while the license administrator can
deploy the licensing solution in a data center with virtual
FEATURE ultraplot admld 3.5 01-may-2011 4 machine installations.
VM_PLATFORMS=VM_ONLY SIGN=”00E3 ……”
The following segment describes some use cases where
License Enforcement Using Bare Metal Binding both virtual machine detection and bare metal binding
As discussed earlier, binding the licenses to virtual machine capabilities can be combined using FlexNet Publisher
hardware may lead to license over usage due to the ease features and syntax to implement more robust license
with which the virtual hardware can be replicated. To enforcement capability:
reduce the possibility of license over usage in markets where
weak trust exists, binding the licenses to physical hardware 1. he example of Software Producer A deploying only
T
elements is recommended. In this method, the license server a served licensing model described in the License
(or the client applications) running on virtual machines will Enforcement Using Virtual Machine Detection section
bypass the virtual hardware and establish bindings with the above is expanded upon. Using the new capability
host system (or the bare metal). In this situation, even if the available in FlexNet Publisher the producer can
virtual machine in which the license server is running is later expand upon the virtualization detection implemented
copied, the bindings break rendering the license previously to include bare metal binding and
server inoperable. mutex detection for additional license enforcement
capability, while not having to build different versions
While the bare metal binding solves the problem of a of the license server. This allows the producer to
license being copied from one physical host to the next, it selectively relax their requirement of a license server
doesn’t eliminate the possibility of over usage. only running on a physical machine on a case-by-case
basis for increased customer satisfaction.
Bare Metal Binding Bare Metal Binding wit h
Mutex Lock Prevents • his is implemented by the software producer by
T
Makes t he Licenses
Mult iple Instances of t he using special hostid keywords on the SERVER
Hard to Copy
License Server on t he line in the license files introduced in FNP. These
Same Physical Box
hostid types specify: a) the platform type that
the license server is authorized to run on, and
b) the hostid type. Some examples are shown
Guest OS Guest OS L
LICENSE below:
S
SERVER
VM Hypervisor
• xample 1: To restrict the license server to
E
Guest OS G
Gu t O
Guest OS VMware ESX server and to use the Ethernet
address of the physical hardware, specify:
Guest OS G t
Guest OS SERVER this_host VMW_ETHER=1234
LICENSE LICENSE
SERVER SERVER
• xample 2: To restrict the license server to a
E
physical machine and to use the IP address of
the machine as the hostid type, specify:
Figure 4: Solutions with Bare Metal Binding and Mutex Lock SERVER this_host PHY_INTERNET=10.10.12.101
Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series 7

8. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
License Enforcement Using the UUID Virtualization and Trusted Storage
In situations where strong trust exists between software The FlexNet Publisher Trusted Storage solution presents its
producers and their customers, it may be desirable to define own unique challenges related to license over usage in a
a more flexible binding method that can be included within virtual environment. The affected functionalities are
a licensing policy. FlexNet Publisher v11.8 will provide three-fold:
the capability to bind the license server to the UUID of the • Anchoring
virtual machine container. • Binding
• Machine Identification Activation Transactions
As previously stated, while it is recognized the UUID can
be replicated and applied to additional virtual machines, These topics are discussed in a little more detail below.
virtualization management software (that is almost always The Trusted Storage technology uses system anchors to
present) ensures the UUID is unique on the network. identify if the trusted storage has been restored from a
backup or overwritten. These are really links to one or more
system identifiers that cross-check the integrity of the Trusted
Storage file with the system. Different anchor types are used
on different operating systems, with some anchors being
much harder to spoof by a user than others. However,
Virtualizat ion a Trusted Storage solution running on a virtual machine
Management only has access to the virtual anchor types, which can be
reverted back quite easily. This affects the trial anchors
implemented by the Trusted Storage solution, with the result
VM1 License VM4 License
UUID=XYZ Server UUID=AAA Server that the trials can be retaken endlessly. The solution to this
UUID= UUID
UID
UUID= problem would consist of storing the anchor information on
XYZ XYZ
the physical host of the virtual machine.
VM2 License VM5 License
UUID=ABC Server UUID=BBB Server The license rights that are held in Trusted Storage are locked
UUID=
UUID UUID=
UUID to a system to prevent them from being transferred illegally
XYZ
Z XYZ
Z
to another system. This is referred to as binding and the
system characteristics use for the binding are referred to
VM3 Lic se
License VM6 License
as binding identities. The problem with virtual machines
UUID=123 Server
Serve
erver
ver
e UUID=CCC Server
erver
UUID=
UUID
D= UUID=
UUID with respect to binding is similar to that of License File
XYZ
YZ
Z XYZ
YZ
Z
based licensing – that the binding identities too easily
duplicated when you copy a virtual machine. The solution
ESX SERVER ESX SERVER
to the problem is also the same – use the physical binding
PHYSICAL MACHINE PHYSICAL MACHINE
identities instead of the virtual ones.
Figure 5: Binding to the UUID of the VM Container
The Trusted Storage activation technology relies upon
Allowing the enterprise customer to bind to the UUID of the uniquely identifying a machine (using UMN values) when
virtual machine container will allow them to support the performing transactions with the activation server (such as
license server and the flexibility to take advantage of other the FlexNet Operations). This is required so that in case
advanced virtualization management capability (such as a of a repair or return transaction, the activation server
high-availability configuration) providing greater flexibility can ensure that the same machine that has activated the
and security to their operation. original license is involved in these transactions. With the
virtualization technology, it is very easy to setup multiple
• This is implemented by the software producer by
machines that look to be the same hence resulting in license
using special hostid keywords on the SERVER over usage. The solution, once again, would rely upon using
line in the license files introduced in FNP v11.8. physical elements for machine identification in combination
For example, To restrict the license server to with virtual machine identities.
VMware ESX and to use the UUID of the virtual
machine instance, specify: Entitlement and Compliance Management
License enforcement in virtualization environments is
SERVER this_host VMW_UUID=1234… only one component of an end-to-end entitlement and
compliance management (ECM) solution.
8 Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series

9. Virtualizat ion and FlexNet Publisher for Trusted Storage and Cert ificate-Based Licenses
In addition to the concerns and approaches presented to software runs on a virtual machine. For example, one new
address license over usage, there are other considerations capability available in VMware’s vSphere 4.0 hypervisor
related to license life cycle activities that may have a and management toolset is the ability to dynamically
bearing on a software producer’s virtualization policies. allocate virtual CPUs (vCPUs). This capability will further
For example, a software producer may want to gather play havoc with CPU based licensing.
data on how many of their products are being used on
physical machines vs. virtual machines. Such data would Research by software industry analysts substantiate the
be invaluable to better understand markets and specific industry trend away from hardware based licensing
customers so these usage patterns can be evaluated as models toward usage based models such as subscription
new licensing models are considered for virtualization and SaaS.2 As has been presented in this paper, the
deployments. This information would also help the software fundamental byproduct of virtualization technology serves to
producer ensure their support staff is appropriately trained remove the time-honored hardware hooks and metrics that
to handle real-world customer deployments. producers have depended upon to secure and monetize
their software.
Gathering of such data can be easily achieved if the license
activation server (such as FlexNet Operations) actively logs FlexNet Publisher will provide the tools necessary for our
the platform type on which the license rights are requested. customers to embrace server virtualization that is now so
Similar logging of the platform data can be done on the prevalent in the enterprise.
license user side via the report log files generated by the
FlexNet Publisher license servers. These report log files can About FlexNet Publisher
then be analyzed using FlexNet Manager to extract the Part of Flexera Software’s Entitlement and Compliance
virtual platform related statistics. Management Solution, FlexNet Publisher enables software
producers and high-tech manufacturers to increase revenues
Other Possibilities and simplify customer relationships.
Advanced product offerings from the virtualization vendors
open up many possibilities to ensure the reliability of a The flexible, yet robust licensing capabilities provided
license server. For example, the High Availability/Fault by FlexNet Publisher allow producers and high-tech
Tolerance features offered by virtualization vendors can manufacturers to address piracy and ensure protection
ensure the license server will never need to be shut down. of intellectual property, as well as to react quickly and
In fact with appropriate usage, the need for three server efficiently to new and evolving markets through creation of
redundancy solutions may also be obviated. new pricing models and versatile product configurations.
Best Practices for the Software Producer FlexNet Publisher is the industry leader, with over 20
Flexera Software recommends the software producer start years of experience, a proven track record, more than
with a more restrictive approach to their policy of allowing 3,000 thousand customers and over 20,000 FLEX enabled
the license server to run in virtual environments and then applications to date. FlexNet was awarded the “Industry best
later relax the policy on a case-by-case basis. Starting with software product for software producers” in 2007 by SIIA.
FlexNet Publisher v11.7, the license server can be restricted
to a physical machine only without needing a change in the About Flexera Software
license file. Then, with FlexNet Publisher v11.8, the new Flexera Software is the leading provider of strategic
license file syntax can be utilized along with a new license solutions for Application Usage Management; solutions
server. The new license file syntax can be released to the delivering continuous compliance, optimized usage and
customers at the time of license renewals so as to cause maximized value to application producers and their
least disruption to the services. customers. Flexera Software is trusted by more than 80,000
customers that depend on our comprehensive solutions -
Caution: If the license server is built and deployed to run from installation and licensing, entitlement and compliance
on virtual machines, this exposure cannot be retracted. It is, management to application readiness and software license
therefore, suggested to use the approach discussed in optimization - to strategically manage application usage
this section. and achieve breakthrough results realized only through the
systems-level approach we provide. For more information,
Conclusion/Summary please go to: www.flexerasoftware.com
As mentioned at the beginning of this paper, most software
producers will initially apply traditional licensing models to For more information on FlexNet Publisher and
virtual environments. Longer term, most also recognize the FlexNet Suite, please visit:
challenges placed upon these traditional models when their www.flexerasoftware.com/fnp
2
As reported in IDC’s Briefing “Going Hybrid with SaaS - Managing Perpetual and Subscription
Businesses in the Same Chassis” on June 17th, 2009 with Amy Konary.
Flexera Software: FlexNet Publisher White Paper Series 9

10. Flexera Software LLC Schaumburg United Kingdom (Europe, Australia (Asia, For more office locations visit:
1000 East Woodfield Road, (Global Headquarters): Middle East Headquarters): Pacific Headquarters): www.flexerasoftware.com
Suite 400 +1 800-809-5659 +44 870-871-1111 +61 3-9895-2000
Schaumburg, IL 60173 USA +44 870-873-6300
Copyright © 2012 Flexera Software LLC. All other brand and product names mentioned herein may be the trademarks and registered trademarks of their respective owners.
FNP_WP_Virtualization2_Sept12