You can use the -m or the -M operand WITHOUT the tcp option and then trapd
will forward the traps to 162/udp on whatever host is specified.
As the man page says, by default traps are forwarded to 162/udp. You can
add the tcp port, and give it a tcp destination on the other box, but not a
udp one.
James Shanks
Team Leader, Level 3 Support
Tivoli NetView for UNIX and NT
Pieter_Van_Cauwenberghe@csi.be@tkg.com on 07/13/2001 03:21:34 PM
Please respond to IBM NetView Discussion <nv-l@tkg.com>
Sent by: owner-nv-l@tkg.com
To: IBM NetView Discussion <nv-l@tkg.com>
cc:
Subject: Re: tme10 [NV-L][TEC] SNMP port 162
Thanks James,
I configured trapd to forward some events to another port with the "-m
hostname+tcp/9000" parameter,
configured the TEC SNMP Adapter to listen on that port with the
"SNMP_TRAP_PORT=9000" environment setting
and get a (T) event saying that trapd can't connect to the remote service.
I have tried several combinations but it won't work, i think the TEC SNMP
Adapter always listens on a udp socket and trapd can only be configured to
forward to a tcp socket.
Do you think this is right? Because in that case one can probably never
forward from NetViews trapd to the TEC SNMP Adapter even if they are on
seperate boxes!
I think i better route the Compaq CIM traps to a TEC SNMP Adapter on
another box, after all these have nothing to do with Network Management.
Pieter
"James Shanks" <SHANKS@us.tivoli.com> on 13/07/2001 00:13:34
Please respond to IBM NetView Discussion <nv-l@tkg.com>
To: IBM NetView Discussion <nv-l@tkg.com>
cc: (bcc: Pieter Van Cauwenberghe/CSI/BE)
Subject: Re: tme10 [NV-L][TEC] SNMP port 162
Well, you can try installing the adapter on the same box as NetView, and
setting him up to listen on some unused tcp port, and configuring the TEC
SNMP adapter to listen there, but I don't know anyone else who has done it
that way, so I don't know how feasible it all is. If you already have
NetView AND TEC on the same box, running the adapter there too sounds like
overkill to me. But you know the loads there better than I do.
On the other hand, the TEC adapter is a small piece of code and it runs
well on a box by itself, and NetView can certainly forward just the CIM
traps to that box if you like, so you'll have to experiment with which one
you like best.
James Shanks
Team Leader, Level 3 Support
Tivoli NetView for UNIX and NT
Pieter_Van_Cauwenberghe@csi.be@tkg.com on 07/12/2001 05:15:22 PM
Please respond to IBM NetView Discussion <nv-l@tkg.com>
Sent by: owner-nv-l@tkg.com
To: nv-l@tkg.com, tme10@list.ephibian.com
cc:
Subject: Re: tme10 [NV-L][TEC] SNMP port 162
Thank you Stephen and James,
Note that i am already forwarding Nodedown/up events from NetView to TEC.
I have a NetView ruleset filtering and correlating these events based upon
some smartsets containing the systems i want to monitor.
This is because the TEC can then create TSD trouble tickets for these
nodes.
But these are all NetView generated events (N)
The thing is, i now need to capture Compaq Insight Manager traps coming
from a few hundred NetWare servers.
The CIM module for Tivoli Enterprise comes with lots of ready to use
rulesets for the TEC aswell as the .cds, .oid and .baroc files needed...
I can't use any of this when the events need to pass through trapd i
believe.
and i'm not (yet) an expert in writing NetView rulesets.
I do have only "1" system for Tivoli!
I considered installing another one solely for the purpose of this TEC SNMP
Adapter but it would probably not be a SUN3500 ;-)
I know this situation is a bit unusual but i am checking out all the
options.
Thanks
Stephen_Hochstetler@tivoli.com on 12/07/2001 19:05:29
Please respond to tme10@list.ephibian.com
To: tme10@list.ephibian.com
cc: (bcc: Pieter Van Cauwenberghe/CSI/BE)
Subject: Re: tme10 [NV-L][TEC] SNMP port 162
Peter,
My background is as a NetView consultant. I would give a strong
recommendation for NetView to receive the SNMP traps....and use NetView's
built in TEC adapter to send just the interesting SNMP traps to TEC for
additional correlation. Do not use the TEC SNMP adapter. This will
give you immense control/filtering capabilities to send TEC only what it
needs and speed up your correlation.
Reasons -
NetView has a larger capacity for handling traps than TEC does.
NetView generates its own traps - example: Interface down, which can be
sent to TEC via the NetView TEC adapter
You can build a NetView ruleset that does some correlation/filtering of
traps before they go to NetView.
-- example: Interface Up came in at next polling cycle, which
cleared Interface Down....so don't send either to TEC
--- example: I am not interested for SNMP traps from desktops in
offices
To send events to TEC from NetView, you will need a NetView ruleset....you
can choose Forward_All if you want to...to test it out (ruleset out of the
box)
You just need to bring up 'Configure', then choose 'Configure Event
forwarding to TEC'. It will ask for hostname for TEC and NetView
ruleset. Go through the other steps in the documentation to get the proper
baroc file in TEC that ships with NetView before turning on the event
forwarding.
Thanks,
Stephen Hochstetler/Tivoli Systems shochste@tivoli.com
International Technical Support Organization (ITSO) - Austin
Office - 512-436-8564 Mobile - 919-247-3468
Pieter_Van_Cauwenberghe@csi.be@list.isis2000.com on 07/12/2001 12:19:31 PM
Please respond to tme10@list.ephibian.com
Sent by: owner-tme10@list.isis2000.com
To: nv-l@tkg.com, tme10@list.ephibian.com
cc:
Subject: tme10 [NV-L][TEC] SNMP port 162
Hi all,
Some advice please,
Envir: NetView 6.0.1 and TEC 3.7 on solaris 2.6, SUN3500
I would like to monitor network devices with NetView but correlate SNMP
traps sent by these and other devices with the TEC through its SNMP
Adapter.
But... NetView and TEC (and the SNMP Adapter) are running on the same
system!
So, If this TEC SNMP Adapter is listening on port 162, NetView's trapd
cannot receive SNMP traps from SNMP Agents.
(and vice versa)
All other NetView features i want to use seem to perform ok.
As long as the TEC SNMP Adapter is started before NetView's trapd daemon,
this design seems to work fine.
Has anyone else done this?
Are there any drawbacks?
(both from the NetView and the TEC point of view)
Should or shouldn't i be doing this?
ThanQ, Pieter
Copyright (c) 2000 Pieter_Van_Cauwenberghe@csi.be. All rights reserved.
TME10 list information (policies, posting, digest version, archives,
downloads,
unsubscribing): http://www.techgroups.tivoli.ephibian.com/listserve
TME10 list searchable archive: http://tme10.uio.no/
TME10 list searchable archive: http://www.vk.net/tivoli/Tivoli-List.nsf
TME10 List FAQ: http://www.concentric.net/~codie/tme10listfaq.html
Tivoli Search Site: http://www.tivoli.com/support/knowledgebase/index.html
Copyright (c) 2000 Stephen_Hochstetler@tivoli.com. All rights reserved.
TME10 list information (policies, posting, digest version, archives,
downloads,
unsubscribing): http://www.techgroups.tivoli.ephibian.com/listserve
TME10 list searchable archive: http://tme10.uio.no/
TME10 list searchable archive: http://www.vk.net/tivoli/Tivoli-List.nsf
TME10 List FAQ: http://www.concentric.net/~codie/tme10listfaq.html
Tivoli Search Site: http://www.tivoli.com/support/knowledgebase/index.html
_________________________________________________________________________
NV-L List information and Archives: http://www.tkg.com/nv-l
_________________________________________________________________________
NV-L List information and Archives: http://www.tkg.com/nv-l
_________________________________________________________________________
NV-L List information and Archives: http://www.tkg.com/nv-l
|