nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [nv-l] Ruleset Correlation

To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Ruleset Correlation
From: Stephen Hochstetler <shochste@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 11:14:14 -0500
Delivery-date: Fri, 28 May 2004 17:38:56 +0100
Envelope-to: nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk
In-reply-to: <91D03459CD3BE04DB5C9894069B252340111553C@omaexch03.csg.csgsystems.com>
Reply-to: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Sender: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com

Scott,

I like your system. I have done something similar for managing a non-IP satelite network once. I did not use a listner since I simply did fast grep on a file to get the parsing that I needed to see if this alarm should be forwarded or not.

You say your listner is generating all 34 events...so I assume you see those in trapd.log. But that only 12 made it to TEC. Why are you using postemsg instead of the TEC adapter? I thought a benefit of the adapter was that it would queue the event if it did not get it sent.

Have you checked a timing issue...for example..if you get 3 events at the same time....is the process single threaded somewhere where only 1 gets forwarded to TEC successfully? If you are calling postemsg within a perl script...can you check for valid return codes?

Have you verified in the TEC reception database that only 12 was received?

Stephen Hochstetler shochste@us.ibm.com
International Technical Support Organization at IBM
Office - 512-838-6198 (t/l 678) FAX - 512-838-6931
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com

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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web