To: | nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [nv-l] Ruleset Editing question |
From: | jpiette@cantire.com |
Date: | Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:32:27 -0400 |
Delivery-date: | Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:26:08 +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 |
Hi James: Thanks for the prompt response. We are running in a AIX 5.1 Unix environment and are currently at Netview 7.1.3. Thanks for your different ideas and since I just learning I would like to try a couple of them in our development environment. Sounds like I probably exceeded the size limit you spoke of. Reading through your note I should first plan on moving to Netview 7.1.4 fixpack 3 before doing anything else. Thanks again. Joe Piette Unix Services Canadian Tire Corp. 905.790.4684
I'm not sure that I understand just exactly what occurred, so I'm just going to answer your questions as best as I can. You may prefer to open a problem to Support so that you can get personalized assistance, send them your samples, and so on. I take it you are on some flavor of UNIX, and I am presuming that you are using 7.1.4 (hopefully FixPack 3). Just as a hint for next time, it's always good to state your release and platform when you ask a question. When you create your own ruleset the first thing you want to do is make sure that the initial node, called Event Stream, which looks like a purple pizza, be set to BLOCK for the initial action. Then only those traps which pass the next elements of the ruleset, or "nodes" as they are called, will be selected for eventual forwarding, provided the ruleset ends with a Forward node. Finally, if you want to use an alternate ruleset to send to TEC, then you must use that ruleset name in the tecint.conf file. But you can easily test a TEC ruleset in an Event Window. It will work the same way. Whatever you see in the Window will be forwarded to TEC. Now with regard to Trap Settings, yes, there is a limit to how many you can have in a single node. There has to be. This is a programming tool after all. Rulesets are just a way to insert user programming into the real-time event flow on your box. But the limitation in the Trap Settings is not a hard and fast one, but a size one, due to buffer sizes. In practical terms this turns out to be about a hundred specific traps, at least as measured under the NetView enterprise. Your results could be greater or fewer depending on the length of the trap names, which are saved for display in the ruleset .rs file. However, the ruleset editor will try to make sure that the size is not exceeded when you are editing and pop up a message if it is. Failing that, if an error occurs, there should also be an error message written to the nvrsEdit.alog/blog (the logs alternate during the edit session as first one and then the other fills up.) So if you didn't see any messages then I'm not certain what might have happened. Now if you have to create a ruleset which singles out hundreds of traps what can you do? There are several alternatives. One is to use several Trap Settings nodes, in parallel rather than in series. Each Trap Settings would have it's own arrow coming from the Event Stream (or the previous node) so that the ruleset would appear to fan out at that point, and then they would all point to the next node, where it would seem to fan back in. I hope that metaphor is clear. The TEC_ITS.rs we ship is a good example of the fan-out, using Event Attribute nodes, We could have written it to fan back in with just one Forward Node instead of dozens, but that would have made it look much more complex than it is, so we chose not to for clarity. Another alternative if maintaining many Trap Settings nodes is too cumbersome would be to use an In-line Action instead. Create a file containing just the specific trap numbers you want to be selected, and write a little script to grep it for the one that was passed in ($NVS), exiting with a zero if found and a nonzero if not. Then plug that script into your in-line action. Set your wait time very low, say two second, to make sure you don't delay trap processing if the grep should hang for some reason. Another alternative is to use an Event Attributes node and select some other attribute of the trap, but this too can get tiresome, as the TEC_ITS.rs ruleset shows, unless your vendors' traps have some unique identifier somewhere. A final alternative might be to use a different approach altogether. Even if your Compaq boxes (or is it Insight Manager?) are capable of thousands of traps, how many in practice are they going to send? If they aren't too verbose, then you might want to let through any trap they send, but only for your most important nodes, your Compaq servers, for example. In that case, you could group all those Important Nodes into a smartset and then your ruleset would just check first, for the Compaq enterprise id in the Trap Settings, followed by a QuerySmartset for the Important Nodes, and only those which pass both are sent on. Note that it is important that you limit the smartset query in some way with a Trap Settings or Event Attributes, because otherwise, you'll be querying smartsets for every trap in the system, and that will drive the entire event flow to its knees rather quickly. Hope this helps, James Shanks Level 3 Support for Tivoli NetView for UNIX and Windows Tivoli Software / IBM Software Group jpiette@cantire.c om Sent by: To owner-nv-l@lists. nv-l@lists.tivoli.com us.ibm.com cc Subject 08/23/2005 03:05 [nv-l] Ruleset Editing question PM Please respond to nv-l Hello: This is my first time submitting a question. I just subscribed to the list yesterday. Netview is a new product to me and I'm learning as I go, so please bare with me. First let me apologize if I use incorrect terminology when talking about Netview. We use Netview strictly as a SNMP manager and to forward alerts onto TEC. I was trying to edit a ruleset and add some filters to limit the traps being forwarded to TEC. I was going through the archives and found an email about editing rulesets and suggesting exploring IBM Redbooks. I found a redbook that showed a step by step example how to prevent certain traps from being forwarded to TEC ( exactly what I want to do ). I have a COMPAQ mib that was used to generate over 1,000 trap definitions. I am only interested in a couple of hundred. So following the example in the redbook I invoked the ruleset editor and added a TRAP SETTINGS node to my ruleset. At first I used the EQUAL TO comparison to only have 2 traps forwarded. I saved the ruleset, recycled Netview and ran a successful test. I then invoked the ruleset editor and used the NOT EQUAL TO comparison, hi-lighting all the traps that I did not want forwarded. Again I saved the ruleset, recycled Netview and ran a test. This time no traps were forwarded to TEC, not even the ones I wanted to be forwarded. So back into the ruleset editor I went and when I opened the ruleset file the TRAP SETTINGS node and the FORWARD node were not displayed. I had place the TRAP SETTINGS node right before my FORWARD node. Question: Is there a limit as to the number of traps that can be identified when using the TRAP SETTINGS node? If I start a session on the Unix Server and perform a simple view of the test1.rs file that I was working with I can see all the trap numbers that I indicated when using the GUI. I did a search through the archives but did not find anything that might indicate what is happening. Any help/suggestion/advice you can offer would be most appreciated. Thanks. Joe Piette Unix Services Canadian Tire Corp. 905.790.4684 |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [nv-l] Ruleset Editing question, James Shanks |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [nv-l] Ruleset Editing question, James Shanks |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [nv-l] Ruleset Editing question, James Shanks |
Next by Thread: | Re: [nv-l] Ruleset Editing question, James Shanks |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd
See also: The NetView Web