nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks

To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: Re: Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks
From: Christopher Short <chsmcs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:15:52 PDT
Thanks....for the futher detail.

Christopher


>From: Edvyn.Lek@BANKOFAMERICA.COM
>Reply-To: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
>        <NV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu>
>To: NV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu
>Subject: Re: Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks
>Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 08:05:20 -0700
>
>Let me try to put some perspective on this ... remember what Cisco uses to
>code
>this application, and since it's java based, it's single processor based -
>performance problem if BIG network. If you network is small, I mean SMALL.
>Then
>yes, otherwise, NO. Leave cw2k alone on its own server. In addition,
>there's no
>integration between cw2k and NV, and if you must you can write your own
>code to
>"integrate" the two products, but not the pull down menus like cw version4.
>
>Additionally, there's no snap-in like in cw version4, for this you will
>have to
>wait for version 3, due out shortly (within the next few weeks?!).
>
>Furthermore, within cw2k, if you have syslog sent to this server (your cw2k
>server), you can write a script to send this syslog as traps to the NetView
>event console via a trigger which you define within cw2k.
>
>Please remember ... cw2k is NOT LIKE cw version4!!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Christopher Short <chsmcs@HOTMAIL.COM> on 10/01/99 06:19:52 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: Edvyn Lek)
>Subject:  Re: Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks
>
>
>
>Michael....
>
>We are using NV and Cisco Works 2000, can the NV client and the Cisco Works
>2000 client live on the same box and integrate into the NV product
>(pull-down menues, product launching, error message correlation), similiar
>to the way they integrate in the server environment.
>
>Any light you can shed would be most appreciated.
>
>Thank You
>Christopher Short
>
>
> >From: MICHAEL_IMHOFF@HP-DENMARK-OM1.OM.HP.COM
> >Reply-To: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
> >        <NV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu>
> >To: NV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu
> >Subject: Re: Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks
> >Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:25:01 +0200
> >
> >      CiscoWorks 2000 is available for NetView 5.1.x as AIX Maintenance
> >      Release #2 (RME 2.2 & CWSI 2.4), which you can download at
> >http://www.cisco.com/kobayashi/sw-center/netmgmt/cw2000/maintenance.shtml
> >
> >
> >      - Michael.
> >
> >
> >______________________________ Reply Separator
> >_________________________________
> >Subject: Re: Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks
> >Author:  Non-HP-whitern (whitern@RBOS.CO.UK) at HP-Belgium,mimegw3
> >Date:    30-09-99 18:18
> >
> >
> >I have to concur with Edvyn, Cisco's Support of AIX is pretty shabby
>.....
> >
> >Neil Whitehead (x22808)
> >IT Services (Telecoms)
> >The Royal Bank of Scotland
> >Tel: 0131-523 2808
> >Mobile:07803 501793
> >e-mail: neil.whitehead@rbs.co.uk
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Brad Martin [SMTP:bmartin@METLIFE.COM]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 4:12 PM
> > > To:   NV-L@UCSBVM.ucsb.edu
> > > Subject:      Upgrading NV & CiscoWorks
> > >
> > >
> > > *** Warning : this message originates from the Internet ****
> > >
> > > We are upgrading from NetView 5.0 to 5.1.1 for AIX. We are also
>running
> > > CiscoWorks 4.0.  Does anyone know whether, CiscoWorks 4.0 is
>compatible
> > > with
> > > 5.1.1 and Y2K compliant?  If not, what about CiscoWorks 2000?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > Brad Martin
> > > MetLife
> >The Royal Bank of Scotland plc is registered in Scotland No 90312.
> >Registered Of
> >fice: 36 St Andrew Square, Edinburgh EH2 2YB.
> >
> >The Royal Bank of Scotland plc is regulated by IMRO, SFA and Personal
> >Investment
> >  Authority.
> >
> >This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only.
>If
> >the m
> >essage is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return the
> >message
> >  to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from your
> >computer.
> >
> >'Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. The Royal Bank of Scotland
> >plc doe
> >s not accept responsibility for changes made to this message after it was
> >sent.'
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web