<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Mobile Access licensing in SASE and Remote Access</title>
    <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260320#M1554</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've always been told Mobile Access licensing was NOT additive, i.e. you can't ADD another CPSB-MOB-50 or&amp;nbsp;CPSB-MOB-200 license to allow for more connections, but need to REPLACE the existing license (with CPSB-MOB-200 or CPSB-MOB-U).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;From&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;sk166032: "&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Mobile Access Blade licenses are NOT additive."&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Testing however draws a different picture.&lt;BR /&gt;I was able to attach a secondary CPSB-MOB-200 license to a gateway on UserCenter.&lt;BR /&gt;"CPSB-SSLVPN-200" now shows up twice in the license string.&lt;BR /&gt;And license status for this gateway in SmartConsole shows the Mobile Access quota has been bumped to 405 (400 from the additional blades, and 5 from the gateway license itself).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did I miss something?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Should I consider this to be some kind of loophole in the current licensing implementation?&lt;BR /&gt;What's your experience with Mobile Access licensing, did you ever try do cumulate licenses?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2025 11:56:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>nmelay2</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-10-20T11:56:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Mobile Access licensing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260320#M1554</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I've always been told Mobile Access licensing was NOT additive, i.e. you can't ADD another CPSB-MOB-50 or&amp;nbsp;CPSB-MOB-200 license to allow for more connections, but need to REPLACE the existing license (with CPSB-MOB-200 or CPSB-MOB-U).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;From&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;sk166032: "&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Mobile Access Blade licenses are NOT additive."&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Testing however draws a different picture.&lt;BR /&gt;I was able to attach a secondary CPSB-MOB-200 license to a gateway on UserCenter.&lt;BR /&gt;"CPSB-SSLVPN-200" now shows up twice in the license string.&lt;BR /&gt;And license status for this gateway in SmartConsole shows the Mobile Access quota has been bumped to 405 (400 from the additional blades, and 5 from the gateway license itself).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Did I miss something?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Should I consider this to be some kind of loophole in the current licensing implementation?&lt;BR /&gt;What's your experience with Mobile Access licensing, did you ever try do cumulate licenses?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2025 11:56:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260320#M1554</guid>
      <dc:creator>nmelay2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-10-20T11:56:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Mobile Access licensing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260321#M1555</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;To my knowledge it is only additive on SMB / Spark appliances and is not otherwise.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Suggesting check with your local account team / account services to avoid issues.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:45:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260321#M1555</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chris_Atkinson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-10-20T12:45:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Mobile Access licensing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260326#M1556</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;My test was on a 6200P.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We need to purchase more licenses for one customer, so indeed, we'll see what we'll be offered.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2025 13:33:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260326#M1556</guid>
      <dc:creator>nmelay2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-10-20T13:33:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Mobile Access licensing</title>
      <link>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260407#M1557</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Im 100% positive those are NON additive and whichever one is highest number "tier", would be one in effect. I ever had Account services confirm that for me before.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2025 02:00:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/SASE-and-Remote-Access/Mobile-Access-licensing/m-p/260407#M1557</guid>
      <dc:creator>the_rock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-10-21T02:00:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

