Re: Netview on SUN Platform

1998-09-16 16:49:20
Subject: Re: Netview on SUN Platform
From: Bonnie Jundt <bonnie_jundt AT MAIL.UND.NODAK DOT EDU>
To: nv-l AT lists.tivoli DOT com
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 15:49:20 -0500
James Shanks also cautioned me.  Thank you James and David.   I did some
checking and it appears that the same situation is true for the Cisco management
software.  From the research I've been doing, it seems that making a decision to
switch to SUN would include switching to HPOV or SDM, as you suggested.  The
advantage I see is that software is developed and tested for HPOV ahead of AIX.
I am leaning toward a 'wait and see' what happens in the next year approach.  I
would like to see and use Netview 5.1 before making a decision.

>>> David Easter <David_Easter AT BAYNETWORKS DOT COM> 09/15 1:14 PM >>>
Hi Bonnie,

  Just as a side note - while Optivity NMS 8.1 does support the Solaris
2.5.1 and 2.6 Operating Systems, we don't currently support NetView for
Solaris.  Support for NetView on Solaris occurs in the NMS 9.0 release
coming in early '99.

  You could switch to HPOV or SDM and maintain support for Optivity NMS
8.1, however I assume that since you're posting to the NetView mailing list
that you intend to stick with NetView.


-David J. Easter
Product Manager - Optivity NMS, Network Management Division
Bay Networks, Inc. - Where Information Flows.


At 02:24 PM 9/2/98 -0500, Bonnie Jundt wrote:
>A decision has been made at our location to switch from IBM/AIX to
>for our network management system.  We currently have AIX 4.2, Netview V4R1,
>CiscoWorks 4.0, CWSI 1.3 and Optivity 8.1.  We also plan to run Cisco
>Manager and Netsys.  We may also want to run MRTG graphs for about 50 devices
>with multiple interfaces.  We currently manage approximately 15,000
objects with
>expectations to grow moderately and to stay up to date with current software
>releases, such as moving to Netview 5.1.
>My research on the appropriate or best server has been inconclusive.  We
>like a server attached graphics console which does not appear to be an
option on
>the Ultra Enterprise 450.  It would be to my benefit to order a server to
>short range future growth rather than go back to my manager a year from
now to
>request an upgrade, therefore I'm not looking for a minimal configuration,
>rather a robust solution.
>SUN hardware recommendations and options, such as amount of memory, would be
>greatly appreciated, particularly from anyone in an environment similar to
>one we anticipate in the near future.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>