Hi Leslie,

your answer just transfers the problem to two other problems we have:

1. we have a lot of different maps for different customers/operators. As
you know we have to open each map with read/write to get rid of an
object in all maps, because there is no other way to delete an object
from all maps (besides undocumented features...).

2. Even after that there are often some relicts of this object in one of
the databases, so we have to stop netmon, ovtopofix etc., and you have
to be root for this (or write your own scripts using Tivoli to start
them or setuid ..., if the person doing the netview work is not allowed
to have root access).

To sum it up, using this way we sometimes need up to two hours just for
fixing netview when some IP-Adresses moved.

So if you think automatic deletion is dangerous then there should be at
least a possibility to use demand-poll for discovering interfaces which
can be deleted and then ask the user if he wants to delete them. It's
safe this way, and it saves a lot of work.

Like I already wrote we will make a change request out of this.

Michael Seibold
debis Systemhaus CCS
Daimler-Chrysler IT Stuttgart



Leslie Clark wrote:
>
> I always tell my customers that deletion is not Netview's best thing; that it
> errs on the side of caution.
> Therefore, if you are doing fancy things like moving addresses between
> routers, or swapping
> out routers and replacing them with new ones, and you KNOW you are doing it,
> just delete and
> rediscover those routers. It is the fastest, cleanest way to do it. If someone
> besides you does this
> work, and they don't tell you about it, you can report them for not following
> change-control
> procedures. I know... network is the LAST department to implement change
> control...
>
> Cordially,
>
> Leslie Clark
> IBM Global Services - Network & Systems Management - Detroit