nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post

To: "Barr, Scott" <Scott_Barr@csgsystems.com>
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post
From: netview@toddh.net (Todd H.)
Date: 16 May 2002 15:37:33 -0500
Cc: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Reply-to: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
"Barr, Scott" <Scott_Barr@csgsystems.com> writes:

> SNMP status polling is set automatically for any router with un-numbered
> serial interfaces OR it is coded in the seedfile:
> 
> routername
> $routername
> 
> The dollar sign forces the previous entry to use SNMP status polling. You
> will probably have to delete and re-discover the node. I highly recommend
> SNMP status polling whereever possible on the basis that it is FAR less work
> to manage interfaces since you don't have to ping all of them (or unmanage
> them).

On the other hand, as James has said, network bandwidth wise, isn't
ICMP pinging cheaper?   

An ICMP echo and ICMP echo-reply pair are pretty tiny in comparison to
individual SNMP GET requests.  IIRC NetView isn't particularly
efficient at aggregating GET's.


-- 
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web