nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [nv-l] Ruleset + up event.

To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Ruleset + up event.
From: Tom Hallberg <gimli@hhcrew.tk>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:36:40 +0200 (CEST)
Delivery-date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:58:50 +0100
Envelope-to: nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk
In-reply-to: <OFD79F56F3.2EEECB34-ON87256F17.0047AE55-85256F17.00493305@us.ibm.com>
References: <OFD79F56F3.2EEECB34-ON87256F17.0047AE55-85256F17.00493305@us.ibm.com>
Reply-to: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Sender: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Thank you, then I probably will go for the script file or ask my TEC
friend to clear it there.

//Tom

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, James Shanks wrote:

> What you see is what you get, Tom.
>
> If you want to pass a Router Up event, then you have to do it explicitly.
> The logic you are saying you want here is much more complicated than just
> a simple reset-on-match.   What you have just said is that you want the
> Router Down held for just five minutes and then passed to TEC if no Router
> Up.  And then you want something to "remember" that you passed this Router
> Down, and pass a matching Router up for time period much later.   Well, a
> simple ruleset cannot do that.  So you have to design something else more
> sophisticated.
>
> When you design a custom ruleset for TEC, you and the TEC guy have to work
> together.  He can code rules on his end, just as you can.   I don't see
> why you cannot send all Router Up events to TEC as harmless and let a TEC
> rule over there match them to any open Router Downs, and if there are none
> them close them.  Or let the operator close them.  If he sees them, then
> clearly there was no match so they no longer matter, right?
>
> If you have to do this in NetView, then I think you'd have to do something
> like this.  You have to keep a record somewhere of Router Down events you
> sent to TEC, and query that list when a Router Up comes in.  One way them
> would be create a file, add the router name to it when you send the event
> TEC (use an action node for that), and then query it in an inline action
> script when the Router Up comes in, and if there is a match, then delete
> the name from the list and send the Router Up.  An alternative would be to
> Set and Query Database fields on the router objects in the database .  You
> can create your own field or use CorrState1 - 4.  You set the field to
> indicate that you sent the trap, then you could query it when the Router
> Up came in and take action that way.   Then clear the field.   You get the
> idea, I'm sure
>
>
> James Shanks
> Level 3 Support  for Tivoli NetView for UNIX and Windows
> Tivoli Software / IBM Software Group
>
>
>
> Tom Hallberg <gimli@hhcrew.tk>
> Sent by: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> 09/22/2004 03:41 AM
> Please respond to
> nv-l
>
>
> To
> nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> [nv-l] Ruleset + up event.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> I got some ruleset design problem. For the moment I got first a "Trap
> Settings" (for Router down events), then a "Inline Action" to check that
> its one of the routers I want to have status check on. After that I have a
> "Reset on Match" because I also take in Router up events so I can reset on
> match within 5 mins. But the problem is that if a router goes down, and if
> it have been down for more then 5 min then it will pass that down event to
> TEC. And let say now that the router when up again, so we got a Router up
> event. But that up event will not pass to our TEC. So are there any
> Templets that can handle the problem about sending onlye one up event when
> there have been a down event passed to TEC. Or do I have to make a new
> Inline Action to take care about that up event that comes after 5 min?
>
> The TEC guy dont want to have all up events. Because the net is quite big.
>
> Thank you
>
> //Tom
>
>

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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web