Re: [nv-l] Routing table pulled

[Paul Stroud <nvladmin@gmail.com>]

Do NOT set it to 0 as that will cause it to pull all the routes use
1 instead.

Paul

Kain, Becki (B.) wrote:

> Do I need it configured at all?  Apparently, this person's concern was
> under HPOV, that when it discovered a router, it made 6000 individual
> snmp get statements for each routing statement.  
>
> What is the impact of setting this to 0?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com [mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com]
> On Behalf Of James Shanks
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 2:53 PM
> To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
> Subject: Re: [nv-l] Routing table pulled
>
>
> This is configurable in xnmsnmpconf, under the field "Number of Route
> Entries".
>
> Default is 800 according to the Help, which you can verify yourself.  If
> you think a max of 800 is too high you can set something else.
>
> Are you having a problem or just worried about one?
>
> James Shanks
> Level 3 Support  for Tivoli NetView for UNIX and Windows
> Tivoli Software / IBM Software Group
>
>
>
>
>             "Kain, Becki
>
>             \(B.\)"
>
>             <bkain1@ford.com>
> To 
>             Sent by:                  <nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com>
>             owner-nv-l@lists.
> cc 
>             us.ibm.com
>
> Subject 
>                                       [nv-l] Routing table pulled
>             10/14/2005 01:41
>
>             PM
>
>
>
>
>
>             Please respond to
>
>                   nv-l
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Folks:
>
>
> Apparently, under hpov, when a router was discovered, the entire routing
> table of the router was pulled as well, causing the cpu to spike because
> it pulled one route at a time.  Does NV do the same thing when it
> discovers a node?
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>