|
Let me chime in with some observations. It's now evening in Jane's town and I hope she's having supper.
1. You won't get traps from a box you turn off. Computers without power don't send messages very well. That's why we poll from NetView. When you turn it back on you get coldStart if it's so configured.
2. NetView's polling is adaptive. It starts by waiting the indicated time between retries then increases the time between each retry. Three retries with three minute intervals is at least ten minutes wait. Are you waiting long enough. Normally timeouts are set in seconds.
Bill Evans
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com [mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com] On Behalf Of Larry Fagan
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 2:41 PM
To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Interface down not receiving!
Jane,
Many thanks here..
When i looked into the netmon -12 in netmon.trcae, it
said that the switch i was looking for , does exist
and the poll interval says 88. This means it polls
every 88 seconds.
Also in global default in SNMP, the setting is set to
5 timeout in 3 retires with 3m. and there is nothing
else configured for sure.
But even by this i'm not getting any interface down
event from this device in trapd.log. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Larry
--- Jane Curry <jane.curry@skills-1st.co.uk> wrote:
> By default, NetView polls everything in his database
> every 5 minutes.
> The default is to use ping for this polling. The
> type of polling is
> sometime changed to use SNMP - this may happen
> automatically (for
> example if a box has unnumbered interfaces) or it
> can be configured via
> the netmon seedfile or in /usr/OV/conf/oid_to_type.
>
> The frequency of the polling is configured using the
> Options -> SNMP
> Configuration menu. By default, this has a single
> global default that
> polls everything every 5 minutes (the frequency of
> the status poll is
> unaffected by the ping/SNMP type). Check this panel
> and see if there
> are other entries - you can specify different
> polling characteristics
> for individual nodes, networks of nodes or by
> SmartSets.
>
> The netmon -a 12 command I suggested earlier dumps
> netmon's ping list to
> /usr/OV/log/netmon.trace. The first field in this
> output specifies how
> many seconds before the device is next to be pinged
> - it's a good
> debugging sanity check.
>
> Cheers,
> Jane
> Larry Fagan wrote:
>
> >Jason,
> >I guess the problem is both.
> >First is that, i have SNMP traps(link up/downs) to
> be
> >sent to Netview is enabled on the device. But i'm
> not
> >getting any traps.
> >Second,
> >As i guess, we have this device in netview and we
> are
> >using ping to check the interface up/down i
> believe.
> >But we are getting any interface down when this
> device
> >is switched off. This is not defined in SNMP config
> or
> >in seed file. Does this means netview uses ping to
> >check up/down's? Pardon my little knowledge in
> here.
> >Many thanks,
> >Larry
> >
> >--- "Allison, Jason (JALLISON)"
> <JALLISON@arinc.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I guess there is two parts, and I am not fully
> aware
> >>of which one you
> >>are having problems with.
> >>
> >>1. Cisco devices can be configured to send alarms
> >>to a management
> >>station when certain events occur.
> >>
> >>2. NetView can be configuerd so that a device is
> >>managed and polled
> >>using some specific interval. When NetView
> >>determines a device is not
> >>responding, it will send a trap to itself of a
> >>device being down.
> >>
> >>Which one are you having problems with?
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>
> >>Jason Allison
> >>Principal Engineer
> >>ARINC Incorporated
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> >>[mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com]
> >>On Behalf Of Jane Curry
> >>Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 9:38 AM
> >>To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> >>Subject: Re: [nv-l] Interface down not receiving!
> >>
> >>
> >>I suppose this switch really is down? There's no
> >>redundant routing
> >>around such that NetView can actually ping this
> >>switch??
> >>The other thing to check is how frequently NetView
> >>is status polling
> >>this switch - use Options -> SNMP Configuration.
> >>You can also check
> >>poll times using netmon -a 12 to dump the ping
> list
> >>to
> >>/usr/OV/log/netmon.trace and netmon -a 16 to dump
> >>the SNMP poll list.
> >>Cheers, Jane
> >>
> >>Larry Fagan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Yes.. Jason..
> >>>The switch is configured and that's the reason we
> >>>
> >>>
> >>are
> >>
> >>
> >>>getting cold start traps and chassis alarms ..
> >>>I'll check if i can put a sniffer on wire..
> Should
> >>>switch send down traps or should netview generate
> >>>
> >>>
> >>if
> >>
> >>
> >>>it cannot ping the switch.
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Larry
> >>>--- "Allison, Jason (JALLISON)"
> >>>
> >>>
> >><JALLISON@arinc.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Is the switch configured to send traps to the IP
> >>>>address of the NV
> >>>>management station? Can you put a sniffer on
> the
> >>>>wire to verify it is
> >>>>being sent?
> >>>>
> >>>>Jason Allison
> >>>>Principal Engineer
> >>>>ARINC Incorporated
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>[mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com]
> >>
> >>
> >>>>On Behalf Of Larry Fagan
> >>>>Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 8:43 AM
> >>>>To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> >>>>Subject: [nv-l] Interface down not receiving!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Hi Guys,
> >>>>Being a newbie i have a problem as usual. We
> have
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>NV
> >>
> >>
> >>>>7.1.3 FP 3 on AIX. The issue is, i'm not getting
> a
> >>>>interface down trap from one of the core switch
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>when
> >>
> >>
> >>>>it is down but i'm getting interface down when
> >>>>another
> >>>>switch from same subnet is swithed off from same
> >>>>site.
> >>>>All i get is some cold start trap and chassis
> >>>>alarms.
> >>>>The switch is in the map and SNMP connectivity
> is
> >>>>fine. But we use pings for this device.
> >>>>Any ideas why netview is not receiving interface
> >>>>down
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>from this device only? Also is switch supposed
> to
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
|