To: | nv-l@lists.tivoli.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: File System Monitoring -Reply |
From: | Michael Seibold PTS/M-SW <mseibold@STR.DAIMLER-BENZ.COM> |
Date: | Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:18:33 +0200 |
Organization: | str.daimler-benz.com |
Reply-to: | Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView et alia <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU> |
Sender: | Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView et alia <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU> |
Hi Etienne, as far as I found out: if your Object has two or more IP-adresses assigned, running in different IP-Segments, it's assumed to be a router. Michael Seibold Etienne Lequeux wrote: > > I ve some hosts considered as routers ("IsIPRouter true") by Netview. These > hosts are not ip forwarders, although multi-homed. Their MIBs are correctly > filled (ipforward no). > Could somebody tell me what are nv6k criterias, to consider a node as router ? > > -- > +-------V-------+ Etienne lequeux ISSF/IRLEu > | A L C A T E L | mailto:Etienne.Lequeux@eu.cit.alcatel.fr > +---------------+ Alcatel Eu |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: What is better Netview V4 or V5, Leszek Pisarek |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Antwort: SNMP Setup / Netview Security, Juergen Strittmatter |
Previous by Thread: | Re: File System Monitoring -Reply, Etienne Lequeux |
Next by Thread: | Source of subnetmask on NetView server with 3 interfaces, Kammerstetter Bernhard |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd
See also: The NetView Web