The plot thickens: I checked the oid_to_type, and the switch which is not
displayed has a BH flag.
--------
Eli Gal - elig@bezeq.com <mailto:elig@bezeq.com>
Bezeq - the Israeli Telecommunications Corp.
Ramat Gan, Israel
tel: +972-3-5.763.763
mobile: +972-50-665493
fax: +1-209-7555542
> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:14:53 +0200
> From: "IMHOFF,MICHAEL (HP-Denmark,ex1)"
> <michael_imhoff@hp.com <mailto:michael_imhoff@hp.com> >
> Subject: RE: Howto Display a Switch on the Network > Submap
>
> Compare the entries in oid_to_type. I think you'll
> find a flag (probably B)
> on the switch that is displayed in the network
> submap.
>
> - Michael.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: elig@BEZEQ.COM <mailto:elig@BEZEQ.COM> [mailto:elig@BEZEQ.COM]
<mailto:[mailto:elig@BEZEQ.COM]>
> Sent: 9. juli 2000 11:36
> To: nv-l@tkg.com <mailto:nv-l@tkg.com>
> Subject: [NV-L] Howto Display a Switch on the
> Network Submap
>
>
> Our Bay-Networks Baystack 450's are displayed on the
> Segment Submap only. It
> would be very helpful for my operators if they could
> be displayed at
> discovery time on the Network Submap.
>
> Please note that we also have Bay-Networks Accelar
> switches and Chipcom's
> shared hubs, and they do get displayed on the
> Network Submap. I compared the
> hubs' and the 450s' object capabilities (via Edit
> --> modify/describe...)
> and they look quite similar (i.e. isConnector,
> isBridge, isHub etc.).
>
> What may be the rationale for not displaying my
> BS450's where I think they
> should have been displayed in the first place? Can I
> overrule this logic to
> make them move up to the Network Submap
|