2 Replies Latest reply on Aug 25, 2013 9:18 AM by andrewv

JBoss EAP 6.1.0 compliance required to be entitled to support

andrewv Aug 25, 2013 1:26 AM

Hi RedHat,

Assuming that a RedHat license for the commercial use of JBoss EAP 6.1.0 were to be purchased, I have a question regarding what I can modify and how I can use the JBoss EAP 6.1.0 installation, without jeopardizing the entitlement to whatever support is offered under the JBoss EAP 6.1.0 License. Assume also, that a License would also be purchased for 64 bit RHEL 6 for JBoss EAP 6.1.0 to be run on.

Environment:

Oracle JDK 1.6.0_26, 64 bit

64 bit RHEL 6

RedHat official binary distribution of JBoss EAP 6.1.0 + all subsequent official RedHat JBoss EAP 6.1.0 binary patches applied according to the instructions supplied with each of those official patches and NO other patches or changes applied.

Can you please confirm whether any of the following would impact on the entitlement to the support component of the RedHat JBoss EAP 6.1.0 Licence:

1. A standard JBoss EAP 6.1.0 binary distribution as obtained from the RedHat customer portal is installed, along with all of the JBoss EAP 6.1.0 binary patches published by RedHat for JBoss EAP 6.1.0, which are applied according to the RedHat supplied instructions.

2. The only JBoss EAP 6.1.0 files modified prior to startup (and not after startup) are: standalone.xml and standalone.conf. They are modified according to the documentation provided for JBoss EAP 6.1.0

3. All deployments / undeployments are performed using the bin/jboss-cli.sh command (as per procedure 9.3.4 and 9.3.5 in JBoss_Enterprise_Application_Platform-6.1-Administration_and_Configuration_Guide-en-US.pdf), based on the recommendation to use that CLI deployment method (stated on page 137).

4. The only other standard commands used to manage the instance are:

bin/standalone.sh (to start it up)

bin/add-user.sh (to add a user so that diagnostic commands can occasionally be run, such as printing the JNDI tree entries).

Otherwise, no other modifications are made to the JBoss EAP 6.1.0 installation.

While I believe that all of these actions are completely within the realms of expected use of JBoss EAP 6.1.0 and do not think that any of these actions would have any impact at all on support entitlements under the JBoss EAP 6.1.0 License, I would just like to obtain confirmation of that as part of License pre-purchase due diligence.

Note that I am not asking about what the support entitlements are or include, but just whether any action I have listed would impact on it.

I would appreciate it if someone from RedHat could comment.

Thanks

Andrew

1. Re: JBoss EAP 6.1.0 compliance required to be entitled to support

wdfink Aug 25, 2013 8:47 AM (in response to andrewv)

Hello Andrew,
if you purchase a subscription (it is different to a license) you are allowed to run the EAP versions on any Java platform with Red Hat support, prefered are those which are marked as 'certified'. If you use a not tested/supported or not certified environment (see this page) this will not mean you have no support, but in some circumstances i.e. Java or OS problems we might find out that this is a specific problem here and we aks for reproducing that on a supported environment.
With that subscription you can use the customer portal for download, knowlegde base and ticket system.

From what I understand your different points:
You are running the EAP on RHEL6 and Oracle JDK1.6 which is supported - see this page
1. run the EAP as is or if you install security patches in the correct order this is no problem. Support patches are not meant as 'incremental' patches and you should not install those without necessity. Installing several patches might have an inconsistent result. In that case you should use a ticked to clarify this.
2,3,4. there are no problems if you use documented features, API's, configurations or deployments

Hope that helps and answered your questions, for specific questions you might ask your sales representative.
Actions
2. Re: JBoss EAP 6.1.0 compliance required to be entitled to support

andrewv Aug 25, 2013 9:18 AM (in response to wdfink)

Hi Wolf-Dieter

You are quite right - I meant subscription, not License. Thanks for your answer, that has made it clear for me ... vielen dank !!

Andrew
Actions

Go to original post