nv-l

Re: Large Scale Netview Implementation Design

1999-01-12 09:30:49
Subject: Re: Large Scale Netview Implementation Design
From: "Whitehead, Neil" <whitern AT RBOS.CO DOT UK>
To: nv-l AT lists.tivoli DOT com
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:30:49 -0000
I assume you mean that you've taken the full 10. address space (from
10.0.0.1 to 10.255.255.254) and split it up more or less evenly between
your customers i.e
Customer A has 10.0.0.1 - 10.0.128.254
Customer B has 10.0.129.1 - 10.1.255.254 etc......

The MLM wouldn't know about any other network apart from the local
customer network and the CMS so no problem there...

But if you mean that Customer A and Customer B may have devices which
have the same IP address, I don't think the CMS will be able to deal
with it. Network Address Translation may help here ...then again may be
not as NAT introduces it's own problems....

Be aware that MLMs cannot do any discovery beyond the local subnet and
do not automatically configure themselves to ping any devices beyond the
local subnet. You have to configure the MLM manaully to ping specific
addresses beyond the local subnet....quite a lot of work in a dynamic
environment, but if the network is relatively static it is manageable.

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: John Creasey [SMTP:creasey AT OZEMAIL.COM DOT AU]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 11:14 AM
> To:   NV-L AT UCSBVM.ucsb DOT edu
> Subject:      Re: Large Scale Netview Implementation Design
>
>
> *** Warning : this message originates from the Internet ****
>
> 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.'


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.'