It makes no difference. And either way, you can import Netview's
discovery into CW. There is a place in CW where you can export
and/or import a comma-separated file of its database. You can
manufacture that from a list of nodes that Netview knows (see
nvUtil, for instance) and speed up CW's discovery considerably.
Actually this does not involve the integration function at all. It's
just that Netview usually does a broader, quicker discovery
than CW does. Once they are in CW's database, it will do the
in-depth discovery on each thing in the file without the fuss of
having to discover that they exist first.
Cordially,
Leslie A. Clark
IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking
Detroit
"Key, Chris"
<Chris.Key@hq.doe To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
.gov> cc:
Subject: [nv-l] Another Cisco
Works integration question
05/16/2002 07:04
PM
We have NetView 7.1.1 already deployed and are just now beginning the
deployment for Cisco Works.
Regarding the NetView/CW integration, should I fully deploy Cisco Works
first and be sure it is seeing/talking to all the same devices as NetView
before doing the integration, or do the integration up front before Cisco
Works is talking to any devices? Does it matter?
Thanks
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Barr, Scott [mailto:Scott_Barr@csgsystems.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 11:37 AM
To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post
The mib is the interfaces mib I believe - the one that contains
AdminStatus OperStatus
If the SNMP address is not reachable the router is down from
NetView's perspective.
-----Original Message-----
From: Key, Chris [mailto:Chris.Key@hq.doe.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 9:07 AM
To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post
Scott,
What MIB is used in the get when using SNMP status polls?
What happens if the SNMP address is the interface down, does it
poll each interface?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Barr, Scott [mailto:Scott_Barr@csgsystems.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 9:03 AM
To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post
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).
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter_Chow@TD.COM [mailto:Peter_Chow@TD.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:35 PM
To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post
Demand poll indicates that a ping is being used.
When I log on to the router and status the interface in
question, it does
indicate that the interface is down.
The only thing peculiar about our lab setup is that there is a
very large
amount of unmanaged devices. Could this be causing the delay?
What is the difference between polling with SNMP as opposed to
ping? Where
is this configured?
Regards, Peter.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 10:55:55 -0400
To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
From: Peter_Chow@TD.COM
Subject: Netview Traps - Time to post
Message-ID:
<OF18B017A7.C9A112B7-ON85256BB8.0051DF29@dms.ops.tdbank.ca>
We're performing some testing with Netview traps in a lab
environment.
One of the tests was to pull out the interface cable on a
router and see
how long it would take to receive the interface down trap on
netview.
We expected to receive the trap within minutes but instead
received the
trap almost two and a half hours later!!!
What is going on here? How can we minimize this 'turnaround
time' to
within minutes?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:31:18 -0400
To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
From: "Leslie Clark" <lclark@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Netview Traps - Time to post
Message-ID:
<OF21AA9E5A.72FB0C2E-ON85256BB8.007B8B26@raleigh.ibm.com>
By any chance are you polling that device via SNMP as opposed
to ping?
You can tell when you do a demandpoll. If it is SNMP, the
status of each
interface is displayed in terms of ifAdmin and ifOper status.
Is it possible that the device itself believes that the
interface is up and
reports it as up, for that long?
Cordially,
Leslie A. Clark
IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking
Detroit
Peter_Chow@TD.COM
To: Leslie
Clark/Southfield/IBM@IBMUS
05/13/2002 03:55 cc:
PM Subject: Re:
[nv-l] Netview
Traps - Time to post
I agree that this is not normal and thank God that its not
happening in our
production environment.
If I ping the interface object after I pull the cable, the
status will
change to down and a trap is received right away.
If I do nothing, then no status update or trap is received for
a long
period (2.5 hrs)..
SNMP Polling Info is : timeout 4.0; retry 3 ; polling 3m.
The IP interface is represented and managed.
Any suggestions on what may be wrong?
"Leslie
Clark" To:
Peter_Chow@TD.COM
<lclark@us.ib cc:
m.com> Subject: Re:
[nv-l] Netview
Traps - Time to post
05/13/02
12:35 PM
Well, that's not good. Fortunately it is not normal, either!
When you pull the cable, can you still ping the address
of that interface from the Netview box? And what is the
polling interval set to? That is in Options...SNMP
configuration
and defaults to 5 minutes. Is the IP address of the interface
represented on the map, and is it managed? You should see
at least an Interface Down event in trapd.log for that
interface
within one polling cyle.
I would have to say there is a lot more to this story than
what you have told us so far. Tell us more...
Cordially,
Leslie A. Clark
IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking
Detroit
Peter_Chow@TD.COM
To:
nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
05/13/2002 10:55 cc:
AM Subject: [nv-l]
Netview
Traps - Time to post
We're performing some testing with Netview traps in a lab
environment.
One of the tests was to pull out the interface cable on a
router and see
how long it would take to receive the interface down trap on
netview.
We expected to receive the trap within minutes but instead
received the
trap almost two and a half hours later!!!
What is going on here? How can we minimize this 'turnaround
time' to
within minutes?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: nv-l-unsubscribe@lists.tivoli.com
For additional commands, e-mail: nv-l-help@lists.tivoli.com
*NOTE*
This is not an Offical Tivoli Support forum. If you need
immediate
assistance from Tivoli please call the IBM Tivoli Software
Group
help line at 1-800-TIVOLI8(848-6548)
------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: nv-l-unsubscribe@lists.tivoli.com
For additional commands, e-mail: nv-l-help@lists.tivoli.com
*NOTE*
This is not an Offical Tivoli Support forum. If you need
immediate
assistance from Tivoli please call the IBM Tivoli Software
Group
help line at 1-800-TIVOLI8(848-6548)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: nv-l-unsubscribe@lists.tivoli.com
For additional commands, e-mail: nv-l-help@lists.tivoli.com
*NOTE*
This is not an Offical Tivoli Support forum. If you need
immediate
assistance from Tivoli please call the IBM Tivoli Software
Group
help line at 1-800-TIVOLI8(848-6548)
|