There is no valid Virtual Map license for the user

Could you tell us which track and update that you use, please ?

Hi @Mayura Wasantha 

This is on Apps10 UPD12

Thanks. This error message intends to acknowledge the user of not having or expired Bing Map Licenses(virtual map) However a bug was fixed in UPD14, to handle a situation where the message pops up even when the Bing maps are not used.

Can you check this  http://lcs.corpnet.ifsworld.com/login/secured/buglnw/BlBug.page?__ID=908425 

and verify it in a UPD14 environment?

Hello All,

I am writing to better understand the license costing and seek clarification on a few queries regarding ATU virtual_map_user for IFS10 UPD14.

License Costing for Increasing ATU Virtual Map User Limit:
Currently, the limit for ATU virtual_map_user for customer is set to 1. Could you please provide information on the costing if we need to increase this limit to accommodate more users? Specifically:

Will the costing be per user, and if so, how much per user?
Additionally, what limit does IFS suggest as ideal for this entity?
System Parameter Related to Virtual Map:
I noticed there is a system parameter related to the virtual map: "Microsoft Bing map license key for virtual map." Could you clarify whether we need to purchase this key separately from Microsoft, or will IFS provide it? Furthermore, if a separate purchase is required:

Do we opt for the free version or the enterprise version, considering that this key needs to be applied in the PROD environment as well?
Could you please provide the full process to align the customer on this matter?
Your assistance in providing clarity on these queries would be greatly appreciated. These details are crucial for us to ensure we are aligned with the necessary licensing requirements and to effectively address the needs of our client.

I look forward to your response.

Thanks,
Hardik

@Mayura Wasantha 
Can you please attach the bug fix document here?
Since we are partners we cannot access IFS internal document

There is no bug fix document here. It’s a bug instance internally registered in a RnD system. May i know what additional information do you expect here?