nv-l

Re: Large Scale Netview Implementation Design

1999-01-12 06:13:48
Subject: Re: Large Scale Netview Implementation Design
From: John Creasey <creasey AT OZEMAIL.COM DOT AU>
To: nv-l AT lists.tivoli DOT com
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 22:13:48 +1100
This is very interesting.
Is it possible to use several mid level managers which poll networks
of overlapping address ranges successfully?

I'm thinking of the case where several networks may make use of unregistered
address ranges eg 10. networks.  Currently we give each of these a separate
NMS for customers which we manage, but it occurs to me that it might be much
smarter to just deploy a mid level manager and have it report back to a
central
NMS.  Does anyone know if this would work?

regards,
John Creasey.

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
[mailto:NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU]On Behalf Of Whitehead, Neil
Sent: Tuesday, 12 January 1999 21:33
To: NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Large Scale Netview Implementation Design


Sounds very similar to the setup that my firm has......

We have one Central NetView server (plus one other as a hot stndby
machine, but let's not complicate things...), and 8 regional Mid-Level
Managers (MLM).

All our operators log onto the Central server and all maps are generated
on that machine. The MLMs are used to offload some of the processing
from the Central machines.

The MLM knows only about the Central NetView Server and its own region.
It is responsible for pinging devices within its own region and reports
status changes to the Central server (which then updates the map).
Using the MLM for pinging, you can set a very high ping rate, without
impacting performance on your core network or your Central server.
The MLM is also responsible for handling all SNMP traps from devices in
its region. You can filter and set up up automation on these traps and
relay them onto the Central Server.

I've never tried to run NetView on the same machine as the MLM, but Is
ee no reason why it can't be done- probably have to play around with
port numbers for trap reception etc, but shouldn't be impossible.

Regards

Neil Whitehead (x22808)
IT Services (Telecoms)
The Royal Bank of Scotland
Tel: 0131-523 2808
e-mail: whitern AT rbos.co DOT uk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zahir Tohir [SMTP:Zahir AT MESINIAGA.COM DOT MY]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 5:00 AM
> To:   NV-L AT UCSBVM.ucsb DOT edu
> Subject:      Large Scale Netview Implementation Design
>
>
> *** Warning : this message originates from the Internet ****
>
> I am required to design a large scale Netview implementation :
>
> The requirement is :
>
> 1) Need 1 Central Netview Server - which have all the maps of regional
> servers and all below it.
> 2) Need 9 Regional Server  - each regional maitain the view of its own
> Regional nodes only (map of its region)
> 3) Regional Netview server do polling on each region an update Central
> HQ -
> so that it minimize network traffic.
> 4) Regional Netview server filter all traps & event and forward only
> the
> CRITICAL event to the Central Netview.
> 5) All will be on AIX Machine
>
> First of all, can it be done ? I never done it before. Need help on
> this
> please...


This message is confidential and for use by the addressee only.  If the
message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return the
message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from
your computer.

'Internet communications are not secure. The Royal Bank of Scotland plc does
not accept responsibility for changes made to this message after it was
sent.'