I agree that 90% is your processes and organization and 10% is your tools.
And that you need to look at functional areas. NetView and NNM basically
only does fault management.
And you are right that in the past a number of network management
applications integrated with NNM. A few still does and actually requires NNM
like Cisco Wan Manager (StrataView).
NNM has been doing level-2 discovery since 97 based on the bridge MIB (just
like Switch Analyzer). This didn't work well (problem with the support of
the bridge MIB from some vendors) and in addition it now uses NMOS combined
with the build in event correlation (since version 6) called ECS (Event
Correlation Services). This is a technology initially developed for the
OpenView telecom products.
The NNM web GUI also integrates other applications just like the native GUI
(via registration files). With NNM 6.31 a J2EE application server is build
in as well.
NNM doesn't run on Linux (only HP-UX, Solaris, NT and Win2k), but OpenView
in general do have agents.
Michael.
-----Original Message-----
From: ADAMCZYK Herbert [mailto:herbert.adamczyk@it-austria.com]
Sent: 19. juli 2002 23:38
To: 'nv-l@lists.tivoli.com'
Subject: RE: [nv-l] NetView vs. OpenView
Eric,
- basically you could manage your network with either hpov or netview
- the detailed requirements of your network-staff are in fact very
interesting: if people are talking what they need, they have to explain
their needs (e.g. functions per management discipline like configuration
mgmt., performance mgmt., fault management etc.)
- the argument of 99% Cisco Devices is beyond the pale - otherwise they
should have to use CiscoWorks2000 !
The advantages of openview are:
- more integrated applications, but this becomes more and more less
important, since most of the tools have web-clients
- if you have a systemmgmt. solution based on hpov, then it would make sense
to take hpov
- if you look at the layer-2 managament functions, then probably hpov could
be ahead of netview in the near future (because they oem-ed the Riversoft
NMOS-Kernel, but the question is how they integrated NMOS into hpov and
built their own root-cause analysis)
- the event application is currently more useful than netview's
The advantages of netview are:
- if you have a systemmgmt. solution based on tivoli, then it would make
sense to take netview
- netviews web-client ist currenty the best (although there is some room for
improvement) - and you can integrate your own applications
- smartsets ! for the gui and the scripts ! (remember the nice nvUtil
command ...)
- mlm for trap-filtering ! anyone knows something similar powerful, simple
AND cheap solution ?
- layer-2: it will be very exciting how tivoli will develope their switch
analyzer
- netview runs on AIX and LINUX ! (does hpov run on linux ?)
- last but not least: I believe in the tivoli support and development team -
they talk to their users and know the requirements of network management in
real life !
cordially
Herbert Adamczyk
INFORMATIONS-TECHNOLOGIE AUSTRIA GMBH
Netzwerk-Management
A-1020 Wien, Lassallestraße 5
Telefon: ++43-1-21717-58943
Telefax: ++43-1-21717-89-58943
mailto: herbert.adamczyk@it-austria.com
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Eric Pobst [mailto:epobst98@hotmail.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Juli 2002 16:15
> An: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
> Betreff: [nv-l] NetView vs. OpenView
>
> The battle continues......
>
> Does anyone have or could point me in the direction of a document that
> outlines the "NetView vs. OpenView" pro's/con's list. Currently at this
> client site we use NetView to monitor all hardware on 100+ aix servers and
> in the beginning stages of rolling the networks into the equation. The
> problem lying, in that the network group has been using OpenView for a few
> years now and they are somewhat convinced NetView would not meet their
> requirements (99% Cisco network devices). So far with absolute certainty,
> I
> can only come up with 3 pts. why they should use NetView.
>
> 1. It is paid for (big one)
> 2. It is already integrated with our Tivoli/Remedy Ticketing system
> 3. They would not have to support the NetView product
>
> Off course, these seem more like "salesman" points, I would prefer to
> provide them a technical capability list. Unfortunately I have not fully
> explored the Network monitoring capabilities of NetView and I have only
> book
> knowledge of OpenView, either way, I do not want to steer them wrong.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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)
|