[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [nv-l] Master Map

To: "'nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com'" <nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Master Map
From: "Evans, Bill" <Bill.Evans@hq.doe.gov>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:44:44 -0400
Delivery-date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 00:45:43 +0100
Envelope-to: nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk
Reply-to: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Sender: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com

Almost but not quite the same. 

The "Master" NetView is non-functioning. It depends on Discovery, Configuration and Status Polling being disabled. All nodes are created manually or by loadhost.  Status is changed by "status change" trap from the active NetViews.   

The backup scenario calls for two fully active NetViews monitoring each other and aware of their own and a copy of the other system's nodes in "unmanaged" state. 

Bill Evans
Tivoli NetView Support for DOE

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com [mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com] On Behalf Of Barr, Scott
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 2:54 PM
To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Master Map

Isn't this what the NetView backup function actually does?

It allows two NetViews to have smartsets containing nodes managed by
other netviews? I haven't played with it that much because the release
notes keep implying it is going away in the Unix environment even though
it seems like an extremely useful function.

Anyone with experience using the NetView backup function care to

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com [mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com]
On Behalf Of Francois Le Hir
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:47 PM
To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Master Map

I heard that this had been done for a customer with very strict security
restrictions. It was not possible to let snmp or ping between the
regions so they implemented some netview server on each region and some
scripts using loadhost to rebuild a complete map of the network in a
central location. The flow of event from the region to the "Master"
allowed to update the "Master" map.
I think that technically it is possible but that doesn't means it's a
idea to do it. Such a setup require a lot of maintenance to make sure it
stay up to date.

Salutations, / Regards,

Francois Le Hir
Network Projects & Consulting Services
IBM Global Services
Phone: (514) 964 2145


             "Quinn, Bob"


             Sent by:                  <nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com>


                                       [nv-l] Master Map

             10/29/2004 02:11




             Please respond to




Excuse the newbie question but ...

I have a co-worker who is not a NetView expert who would like me to make
NetView do something it is not designed to do.  I'd like to tell him

We will have several NetView installations (7.1.4 FP2 AIX 5.1) in
regions across the US each discovering and monitoring devices only in
own region (about 4000 nodes per region - 10 regions total).  He
there must be a way to create a master map that does not do its own
discovery or polling (disabled in Options  Topology/Status Polling) but
fed from the regional NetViews.  If a regional NetView discovers a
and it is a router, switch or server (controlled by SmartSets) he
it send a trap to the master console that will then execute a script
runs loadhosts and adds the device to the master map.  He also proposes
that status changes detected by the regional NetViews initiate traps to
master and change the status on the master map.  I've read James info
was posted a while back on changing the status of an icon.  While each
individual piece of what my coworker is proposing seems techically
on the surface, the solution as a whole doesn't seem practical to me.

So which one of us is nuts?


(See attached file: winmail.dat)

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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web