[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?

To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?
From: Mark Sklenarik <marksk@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:03:37 -0400
Delivery-date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:04:16 +0100
Envelope-to: nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk
In-reply-to: <EFF2105927F5EE4EA64093699274875A02468460@fnbrbgmx01.fnb.co.za>
Reply-to: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Sender: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com

Run a "/usr/OV/bin/mapadmin -l",  how many maps are listed?
If more than one,  have you made sure interface/node is unmanaged on all maps?
Are you doing this on the X11 GUI or the Web Console?

Mark F Sklenarik   
IBM SWG Tivoli Solutions   Quality Assurance    Business Impact Management and Event Correlation  Software Quality Engineer


"Pretorius, Vynita" <VPretorius@fnb.co.za>
Sent by: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com

04/07/2005 10:50 AM
Please respond to

RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?

HI all

V714 fp03 - solaris 2.8

I have the exactly the same thing I unmanage an interface and the next
it alerts that it is down. I have even tried to allow only snmp and no
pings to it and this still is not helping.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com [mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com]
On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 1:16 PM
To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?

A device, once unmanaged, will stay unmanaged.

That being said, there is one thing I can think of that will cause the
device to become managed again. The most common is that the
interface is a duplicate ip address of an interface on another
device. You actually have it figured out, you just dont know why;-)
What happens is when the other device is configuration polled, it
removes the interface from the first device and adds it to this device.
Then when the first device is configuration polled, it gets removed
from the other device and added back to the first one, except now
its managed. Any time a new interface is added to a device, it is
managed(unless otherwise configured in the snmp configuration).
So it looks like the interface simply remanages itself, but actually
that is not the case, it is removed, readded and managed because
it is newly discovered. SOOOO, now you what can you do.....well,
you can find the other device and reconfigure it. You should actually
be able to find in your trapd.log which other device the interface
in configured on, you should see a interface deleted on the other
device and then an interface added on the first one. It sounds
complicated, but we see it alot. Now, if you know this interface is
duplicated somewhere else for some reason in your environment,
you can simply define the interface as HSRP in the seedfile(%) and
then run "netmon -y". This will cause netmon to reread the seedfile
and set the interface as an HSRP interface, then you can unmanage
it safely and it should not return(at this point you can also hide it).

Hope that helps,

Duppong, Jason wrote:

>Hello List,
>I think I know the answer to this already, but I wanted to bounce it
off the
>list anyways.  Is it possible to have Netview permanently ignore an
>interface or interfaces on a node?  I know I can unmanage interfaces,
>the problem we have is interfaces that are already unmanaged somehow
>managed again when something happens to that node (I'm thinking a
>configuration scan).  I've been able to narrow the problem down to a
>of nodes whose interfaces are on the same subnet even though the nodes
>completely unrelated.  A couple other cases involve nodes with
duplicate IP
>addresses even though the nodes are unrelated.  As much as I would like
>I'm unable to "fix" these problems due to the nature of these nodes.  A
>search through the archives has not turned up anything that helpful, so
>hoping someone might have a better solution then what I'm currently
doing or
>planning.  Currently I have a cron job that unmanages the interfaces in
>question.  I'm thinking about writing a script that would collect the
>addresses on the problem interfaces and use the list in our alerting
>infrastructure to drop any alert from these interfaces, but since we
>really care about these interfaces at all, the ideal solution would be
>configure Netview so it simply ignores everything about the interface.
>Thanks for any help in advance!
>Jason Duppong
>Senior Systems Engineer
>Thomson Legal and Regulatory Technical Services


The views expressed in this email are, unless otherwise stated, those of the author and not those
of the FirstRand Banking Group an Authorised Financial Service Provider or its management.
The information in this e-mail is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee.
Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or
omitted in reliance on this, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
Whilst all reasonable steps are taken to ensure the accuracy and integrity of information and data
transmitted electronically and to preserve the confidentiality thereof, no liability or
responsibility whatsoever is accepted if information or data is, for whatever reason, corrupted
or does not reach its intended destination.


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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web