Well I messed that one up. Here's a corrected one.
=======================
I'd use a QUERY DATABASE for a variable set to identify those four nodes. I
think it's one of the less expensive functions.
You have to identify the capability isOneOfFour to the system so it will exist
in the dataabase.
Edit /usr/OV/fields/C/ovw_fields and add the following
/* Comments */
Field “isOneOfFour” {
Type Boolean;
Flags capability;
}
Run ovw_fields to get it into the database structure.
Then you have to set that capability for each of your devices:
#!/bin/ksh
echo "IP Hostname,isOneOfFour" >/tmp/temp.import
for Item in "One.local.node Two.local.node Three.local.node
Four.local.node"
do
echo "${Item},TRUE" >>/tmp/temp.import
done
/usr/OV/bin/nvdbimport -f /tmp/temp.import
Test for the "isOneOfFOur=TRUE" capability in your rule.
We used to teach this in the "NetView for Unix for Administrators" course back
in Version 4 and 5 timeframe.
Bill Evans
Tivoli NetView support for DOE
-----Original Message-----
From: nv-l-bounces@lists.ca.ibm.com [mailto:nv-l-bounces@lists.ca.ibm.com] On
Behalf Of Van Order, Drew (US - Hermitage) Sent:I think the Query Database is
one of the less expensive functions. Tuesday, November 21, 2006 12:41 PM
To: Tivoli NetView Discussions
Subject: [NV-L] Best method to filter traps from specific IP addresses in
ruleset
Hi everyone,
Our customer has been receiving Peribit traps for a few weeks. It currently
looks like this in the ruleset:
Trap Settings node for Peribit trap Enterprise ID (all traps
highlighted) ----> Forward to TEC
Customer has requested that for just one of the traps, we only forward if it
comes from 4 IP addresses, otherwise drop. I figure I will deselect this trap
from the current Trap Settings node, then add a second Peribit Trap Settings
node with just the one trap highlighted.
It's after this step that I am wondering what will be most efficient.
I know I can create a SmartSet with just these 4 IP addresses, but understand
SmartSet queries in rulesets are very expensive, and I don't want to compromise
performance since this is also our TEC_ITS ruleset.
Is there a better way to do this w/o Smart Set query? I don't want to create a
TEC rule for this, I think it's smarter to do it closest to the trap source.
Thanks!---Drew
Drew Van Order
Information Technology Services
Deloitte Services LP
Tel: +1 615 882 7836
www.deloitte.com
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If
you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message.
Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any
action based on it, is strictly prohibited. [v.E.1]
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.12/544 - Release Date: 11/21/2006
4:59 PM
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.12/544 - Release Date: 11/21/2006
4:59 PM
_______________________________________________
NV-L mailing list
NV-L@lists.ca.ibm.com
Unsubscribe:NV-L-leave@lists.ca.ibm.com
http://lists.ca.ibm.com/mailman/listinfo/nv-l (Browser access limited to
internal IBM'ers only)
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.12/544 - Release Date: 11/21/2006
4:59 PM
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.12/544 - Release Date: 11/21/2006
4:59 PM
_______________________________________________
NV-L mailing list
NV-L@lists.ca.ibm.com
Unsubscribe:NV-L-leave@lists.ca.ibm.com
http://lists.ca.ibm.com/mailman/listinfo/nv-l (Browser access limited to
internal IBM'ers only)
|