The licensing server is very much a pain in any installation, and I would imagine with the dual NIC it would be even more so. Do you operate them independently for load balancing, or do you have them teamed?
The licensing server is very much a pain in any installation, and I would imagine with the dual NIC it would be even more so. Do you operate them independently for load balancing, or do you have them teamed?
Not teamed but the server in question is running NeverFail and it seems that BES10 doesn't know how to determine which NIC is the primary one so the licensing infrastructure link works but when you try to add the CALs to the server it fails. According BBRY the server behaves as if the nics are teamed but they aren't We had to setup a secondary server for the time being on a since NIC and install the license server on it while we wait for BBRY dev to release a fix. I don't think they know themselves on a code level how to determine which NIC in windows is the primary one; ether on the registry level or windows advanced network settings level. Too bad so sad!
Not teamed but the server in question is running NeverFail and it seems that BES10 doesn't know how to determine which NIC is the primary one so the licensing infrastructure link works but when you try to add the CALs to the server it fails. According BBRY the server behaves as if the nics are teamed but they aren't We had to setup a secondary server for the time being on a since NIC and install the license server on it while we wait for BBRY dev to release a fix. I don't think they know themselves on a code level how to determine which NIC in windows is the primary one; ether on the registry level or windows advanced network settings level. Too bad so sad!
So it's now just a waiting game.
That is unfortunate. I have installed on VMs so didnt have that issue (others related to the licensing service though). I personally dislike this new add-on but I do understand why it is there. The previous CAL management was 100% non-existent.
That is unfortunate. I have installed on VMs so didnt have that issue (others related to the licensing service though). I personally dislike this new add-on but I do understand why it is there. The previous CAL management was 100% non-existent.
NeverFail has its own NIC, it's a heartbeat network, along with its own packet driver. NeverFail does work for BES 10 just not fully for 10.1.x, so right now the failover works without a hitch only the licensing server is fubar.
First you really need to know your HA's. The BES HA isn't as reliable as NeverFail which has been around longer than BES.
Secondly, the issue has already been determined by the BBRY dev team. If BES 10.1.x was programmed correctly to be able to determine which the licensing management goes through, it is smart enough to notice that NIC A is the primary NIC which it acknowledges in the logs and checks to see if it has access to the license.blackberry.com server (on port 443) but as for what happens next it gives up saying there are two IPv4 loop back network adapters. I also know that BBRY knows who NeverFail in the marketplace as they had to work with them to get BES 10.0 and BES 4 and 5 working.
The licensing server is setup temporarily on a separate box with a single NIC but it can't be setup that way as perminate solution because what happens if the side of the network that it resides on blows up?
And to add your theory about NeverFail having a virtual NIC, it doesn't use a virtual, it uses a physical one.
Last edited by smoothrunnings; 07-26-13 at 08:12 AM.
