Why is the Status of a Product Compliant if negative balance in the Position Report?

[Elie Baho]

Hello, I just finished the SAM Implementer course for the second time and I still can't wrap my head around 2 things:

In this example, why is SQL Server Enterprise 2016 COMPLIANT if it has a negative license balance?

The Compliant or NON Compliant is based on what indicator then?

2nd question:

When a product has way more than enough license entitlements but the Licenses required is equal to zero and it has many Unlicensed Installs, why aren't the unlicensed Installs calculated in the Licenses required total?  The normalization is completed on the Discovered Models.

Is it expecting a different license metric to cover these Unlicensed installs?  If so, where do we see the details of the Unlicensed Installs expected license metric that'll cover them?  If I display this field in the details, it's empty...

[peterikeda1]

The agreement type of the entitlement can determine the compliance status:
Solved: SAM Pro Entitlement Agreement Type: Generic and EL... - ServiceNow Community

Although I'm dealing with a similar situation now where even the agreement type doesn't explain away this discrepancy. If I'm able to figure out and I'll update this thread

[dreinhardt]

Hi @Elie Baho,

#1) You're right, by default the result should be "Not Compliant". I can assume the following options ...

- The entitlement agreement type is also responsible for this in case of Microsoft. As soon the type is an enterprise agreement the result will always be compliant, but since W.DC/Xanadu a little icon with a true up note is added.

- the SAM simulator is not working as it should be.

#2) When a product has way more than enough license entitlements but the Licenses required is equal to zero and it has many Unlicensed Installs, why aren't the unlicensed Installs calculated in the Licenses required total?  The normalization is completed on the Discovered Models.

- Please check the "install requiring actions" to get more insights into this

- If it's the simulator, looks like again an issue. By default , each unlicensed install is counted by "licenses required"

Best, Dennis

[Elie Baho]

As much as I would love to go back to this example, it's been over 9 months since I opened this thread.   I don't have access to these license workbench results anymore.

Weather the issue is a simulator or a real life example, why is it fundamentally this confusing?  A license compliance position should be simple.