nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FW: Problem for represent meaningful information in

To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: Re: FW: Problem for represent meaningful information in
From: Steve Francis <steve.francis@COMMSERV.UCSB.EDU>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 09:22:41 -0700
OK, thanks for clearing that up.  I just did not want there to be some nasty 
side
effect I hadn't hit yet.

I am not using it for status polling, just thresholding things like monitoring 
when
the default route changes on a router in a collection, that do not seem to be
otherwise possible in just Netview, but simple with MLM.

James Shanks wrote:

> Well, Steve, MLM did not used to automatically disable midmand from listening
> for traps.  If it does now, great.  I don't install, configure, run, or debug
> code on MLM, and my experience was that it caused more problems than it 
> solved.
> If you aren't using it for status polling, then sure, I don't see why you
> couldn't install it that way.  But you certainly cannot do the same kind of
> "attended" thing you can do with NT.   In that case, midmand and netmon 
> actually
> talk with one another, and that code is most definitely not in the UNIX 
> flavor.
>
> Since what Maggie was doing was an initial install for status monitoring I 
> still
> would recommend that she not install MLM on the same box as NetView.
>
> James Shanks
> Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
>
> Steve Francis <steve.francis@COMMSERV.UCSB.EDU> on 08/12/99 11:29:52 AM
>
> Please respond to Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
>       <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>
>
> To:   NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU
> cc:    (bcc: James Shanks/Tivoli Systems)
> Subject:  Re: FW: Problem for represent meaningful information in actionbox
>       of ruleset & Concerns about using MLM
>
> James Shanks wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > (1)  MLM and NetView for UNIX should not be installed on the same box.  So
> there
> > is no reason to change the trap port, but if for some strange reason you
> insist
> > on MLM and NetView for UNIX on the same box, then midmand must get a new 
> > port.
>
> I'm a little worried that you say that.  It seems to be a good thing to do so 
> to
> me,
> but perhaps I'm missing something.  When you install MLM on the Netview box, 
> it
> automatically disables MLM from listening on the trap ports, and leaves that
> function to Netview.
>
> The reason I think its a nice thing to do is that the MLM has more flexible
> thresholding and analysis than native Netview, and lets you use the APM more
> fully
> (if you dont have any other MLMs)
>
> Is there really a reason not to run it on the same (AIX) box?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: FW: Problem for represent meaningful information in, Steve Francis <=

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web