| To: | nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface? |
| From: | Javier Morate Guerrero <jmorate@carrefour.com> |
| Date: | Thu, 7 Apr 2005 17:31:21 +0200 |
| Delivery-date: | Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:32:13 +0100 |
| Envelope-to: | nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk |
| In-reply-to: | <OFF568EDD0.EB8F4A07-ON85256FDC.005286B3-85256FDC.0052BBFF@us.ibm.com> |
| Reply-to: | nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com |
| Sender: | owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com |
V714 fp02 AIX 5.1
1 map
Hi,
By the configuration that we have of high availability, we have two
routers with some interface duplicated between them. If I unmanaged one,
when netmon tested in the other, the interface was transferred and managed.
I removed the leading comment character of the following lines of the
netmon.conf file:
# Set to TRUE to report duplicate IP addresses, don't remove
them.
NV_NETMON_REPORT_DUP_ADDRS_ONLY=TRUE
# Set to TRUE to generate a duplicate event as in v5
NV_NETMON_GENERATE_DUP_ADDR_EVENT=TRUE
The interfaces are not transferred and either they are not managed.
Un saludo,
Francisco Javier Morate Guerrero
Dpto. Gestión de Sistemas
Carrefour España
jmorate@carrefour.com
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?, Mark Sklenarik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: [nv-l] Cisco PIX Monitoring, James Shanks |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?, Mark Sklenarik |
| Next by Thread: | RE: [nv-l] Permanently Ignore Interface?, Duppong, Jason |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd
See also: The NetView Web