nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Antwort: Re: nvserverd start/end events to tec

To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: nvserverd start/end events to tec
From: Muni Chatarpal <munic@LUCENT.COM>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:14:35 -0800
sorry about this wasted bw, but how do I unsubscribe to this forum ?   I 
tried sending an email to
listserv@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU with the following in the body


unsubscribe NV-L first name lastname


Dis not seem ot have done the trick


At 12:33 PM 02/02/2000 -0500, you wrote:


>If the "you" here is meant to be "me", that is "James Shanks", then the answer
>is "No, I could not explain how this works in TEC, that is why I sent you 
>to the
>Tivoli forum where TEC is discussed."
>Perhaps some other NV-L reader can.
>
>But NetView 5.1.2 does not  contain any patches or updates to TEC.
>
>James Shanks
>Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
>
>
>
>Eva-Maria Fettig <efettig@HAITEC.DE> on 02/02/2000 12:08:03 PM
>
>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:  Antwort: Re: nvserverd start/end events to tec
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Could you explain the mechanism inside TEC  that closed this fatal nvserverd
>event? I don't mind the event being closed but I would like to know how it
>works. Usually a rule is applied against an event to close it. But there is no
>rule for this! Did I install a TEC Patch with that Netview Upgrade with some
>"hidden" rules?
>I'd just like to know how it works. And it would be fine if I could see the
>harmless event on the TEC console also.
>
>Thanks
>Eva
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----------
>
>
>Eva-Maria Fettig           e-mail: efettig@haitec.de
>Haitec AG                 Tel. +49 89 35631 3393
>Alois-Wolfm
>
>
>üller-Str. 8   Fax +49 89 35631 3300
>80939 München             Mobil +49 172 8592939
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>------------
>
>
>
>
>James Shanks <James_Shanks@TIVOLI.COM> am 02.02.2000 17:32:49
>
>Bitte antworten an Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
>       <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>
>
>An:   NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU
>Kopie:     (Blindkopie: Eva-Maria Fettig/HAITEC/DE)
>
>Thema:    Re: nvserverd start/end events to tec
>
>
>
>
>Good idea, Leslie, but I am afraid it won't work in this case.
>
>These TEC events are not traps received by trapd (which could be 
>manipulated in
>the way that you describe) but rather, they are internally generated events by
>nvserverd.  They have to be, because the "ending" message is the last thing
>nvserverd sends before he goes down, and the "re-connected" message is the 
>first
>thing he sends when he comes up.  So timing requires that these not be traps,
>and besides, they probably would not make it through the customer ruleset 
>doing
>the trap forwarding, if we made them into traps.   So they are not 
>customizable
>in that way.   They aren't customizable at all.
>
>Interestingly enough, the reconnected message was "added" in 5.1.2 to do 
>exactly
>what the complaint was that started this thread.  It was designed to 
>remove the
>"nvserverd ending" message from the TEC event console and thereby "close the
>loop" with TEC.  It had always been part of the design, it was just never
>implemented until other people complained that when they recycled NetView they
>had these open events left on their TEC consoles that did not go away when
>NetView came back up.  I am sorry that the original poster doesn't like 
>the way
>that this works.  It was specifically designed to do just that.
>
>James Shanks
>Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
>
>
>
>Leslie Clark <lclark@US.IBM.COM> on 02/02/2000 11:02:30 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:  nvserverd start/end events to tec
>
>
>
>
>I would go to the event configuration function and manipulate the
>status that is sent with these events. The CLOSED and HARMLESS
>business is set there, in the T/EC slot mapping dialog. Then you don't
>have to change the rule on the T/EC server that would effect more events
>  than just these.
>
>Cordially,
>
>Leslie A. Clark
>IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking
>(248) 552-4968 Voicemail, Fax, Pager
>
>
>
>
>


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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web