Yes, I'd recommend it. However, TMNC only looks at
Interface Down or Node Down traps, and that's the
limits of its functionality. If you got an Critical
application trap, I don't think it's going to try to
do anything with it. I believe, it actually read in
the entire topology database periodically, so I am
pretty sure it can only monitor Interfaces and other
IP reachable entities. TMNC is certainly a quick and
dirty way to forward useful information to the TEC.
Is it worth the $25K to you? That I can't tell you. I
know SMARTS has a 60 day trial offer on their INCHARGE
product, download it and give it a try.
I am using the tecad_nv6k TEC adapter to forward
application related Events in conjunction to TMNC.
However, it would be interesting to use the SMARTS
Codebook Rule engine for the application events, and
see how it compare to TEC. I don't know the price on
that, I'd assume it's in the five to six figures, and
I am certain that's more than I want to spent for
correlate 10-15 application related events.
Xu He
--- "Todd E. Lewis" <telewis@PROVBANK.COM> wrote:
> Ok, so you would recommend ? Will it pass all
> critical traps regardless of enterprise?
>
> >>> Xu He <xuhe@YAHOO.COM> 07/30 2:01 PM >>>
> Yes. We are using TMNC. It is certainly a nice
> tool
> for forwarding message to TEC. The beauty of it is
> that it works right out of the box. I think it only
> checks the Critical or Node-up messages, and send a
> summarized event to TEC. I get about 2000 messages
> a
> day; TMNC only reports about 20~40 events, and
> closes
> them when the device comes backup. The only slight
> draw back is that when Tivoli licensed TMNC from
> SMARTS (System Management ARTS), I don't think they
> licensed the development kit. Therefore, you can't
> create customized rules, and use the SMARTS Codebook
> correlation engine, which is much faster than the
> TEC
> rule-bases correlation engine.
>
> Couple of things to watch for:
>
> 1. Get the TMNC 1.01 patch, there's a huge memory
> leak in the 1.0 release.
>
> 2. You may have to increase the correlation
> interval.
> Sometimes, events doesn't show up at the Netview
> server for the correlation to work efficiently.
>
> 3. Your netview Map has to be very clean (i.e. no
> phantom objects in the ovwdb, no old WAN segments
> that
> didn't get cleaned upon topology changes, etc )
>
> Hope this helps
> Xu He
>
> --- "Todd E. Lewis" <telewis@PROVBANK.COM> wrote:
> > Does anyone using this product for NT? Is it worth
> > the investment?
> >
>
> ===
> Xu He
> Consulting Services Engineer
> Network Solutions, Inc
> http://www.netsol.com/consulting
>
_____________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Free instant messaging and more at
> http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
===
Xu He
Consulting Services Engineer
Network Solutions, Inc
http://www.netsol.com/consulting
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
|