Perpetual licenses with active maintenance not covering latest software version

[Anshul Dewan]

Hi everyone,

I’m trying to understand if I have configured upgrade/downgrade rights correctly for a software product.

We have 2,200 perpetual licenses, all covered by active maintenance, so my understanding is that they should provide rights to use the latest version. However, most of the perpetual entitlements were originally created against older software models based on purchase history:

• Version 13: 1,577 perpetual
• Version 2021: 300 perpetual
• Version 2022: 123 perpetual
• Version 2026(Latest): 200 'Perpetual + Maintenance', plus 2,000 Maintenance (this 2000 maintenance is for all above perpetual licenses)

Version 2026 has a DMAP, and the older versions are automatically listed under its downgrade rights.
We have 1902 installations of the software 2026 version. 6 installations for software 2022 version, 4 installations for software 2021 version and 1 installation for software 13 version.

After reconciliation, the older versions are compliant, but Version 2026 shows a shortage of 1,702 licenses. It has license required of 1,902, but reconciliation appears to recognize only the 200 Perpetual + Maintenance licenses directly associated with Version 2026.

Overall, we have 2,200 perpetual licenses and 2,200 maintenance licenses, while total consumption across all versions is only 1,913.

My question: How should the older perpetual entitlements with active maintenance be configured so they can cover installations of the latest Version 2026? Am I missing an upgrade-rights or entitlement relationship between the older software models and Version 2026?

For reference, the agreement type is Generic and the license metric is Per User.

[pr8172510]

Hi @Anshul Dewan,

The key distinction here is between downgrade rights and upgrade rights.

Your Version 2026 DMAP showing Versions 13/2021/2022 under downgrade rights means that a Version 2026 entitlement can cover installations of those older versions. It does not by itself make the older perpetual entitlements valid for Version 2026.

For publishers other than Microsoft, ServiceNow provides a maintenance entitlement → Upgraded Entitlements relationship to link the entitlement to a newer software version as part of the maintenance contract.

Related Entitlements relationship to associate the maintenance entitlement with the underlying perpetual entitlement.

 verify

1. Maintenance → Related Entitlements
   Confirm that the 2,000 maintenance rights are actually linked to the 1,577 + 300 + 123 perpetual rights.
2. Maintenance → Upgraded Entitlements
   Verify that those maintained perpetual rights are linked to the Version 2026 software model/entitlement as the upgrade target.
3. Upgrade History
   Check whether the affected perpetual entitlements show an upgrade history to Version 2026. ServiceNow provides Upgrade History specifically to track the previous and newly upgraded software model.
4. Re-run reconciliation after correcting the entitlement relationships.

Your numbers are also a useful indicator

2,200 total perpetual rights − 1,913 total installations = 287 rights remaining.

The Version 2026 shortage of 1,702 is exactly what you would expect if reconciliation is currently considering only the 200 Version 2026 rights:

1,902 Version 2026 installs − 200 Version 2026 rights = 1,702 shortage.

So I would not add another 1,702 licenses or modify the DMAP first. I would verify the maintenance-to-perpetual relationship and the Upgraded Entitlements relationship to Version 2026.

Also, the Generic agreement type and Per User metric don't by themselves establish the upgrade relationship
the publisher's actual maintenance terms still need to grant the upgrade rights.

[Anshul Dewan]

Your explanation makes sense.
Version 2026 DMAP does show Versions 13/2021/2022 under downgrade rights.
I completed the first step and linked the maintenance to 1,577 + 300 + 123 perpetual rights.
However, I am unable to follow the second step Maintenance → Upgraded Entitlements. Since the license type of the 2000 entitlement record is maintenance I don't see Upgraded entitlements tab on the record. Do I need to create a new record with upgrade license type with 2000 rights and link it to version 2026 software model?

[pr8172510]

Hi @Anshul Dewan ,

You shouldn't create a separate 2,000-right Upgrade entitlement just because the Upgraded Entitlements tab isn't visible.

For non-Microsoft publishers,  a Maintenance entitlement can be associated with Perpetual, Perpetual + Maintenance, and Upgrade entitlements through the Upgraded Entitlements tab.

Since your 2,000 Maintenance entitlement is already associated with the 1,577 + 300 + 123 perpetual rights, I would first check the Maintenance entitlement form layout/view to determine why the Upgraded Entitlements related list isn't available.

Also verify the Next Version configuration on the associated software model and whether it applies to your metric group.

I would therefore not create 2,000 Upgrade rights simply to make the 2026 reconciliation compliant.

The entitlement/upgrade relationship should represent the actual licensing and maintenance terms.

[Anshul Dewan]

I reviewed the Maintenance form layout along with the Perpetual and Perpetual + Maintenance layouts. From what I can see, the Upgraded Entitlements tab is not available in any of these layouts and only appears when the license type is Upgrade.

At this point, I don’t have another way to validate whether the Upgraded Entitlements tab should also be available for the other license types, so I’ll rely on your guidance that this is the expected functionality.

Regarding the Next Version configuration, that had already been set for all the software models.