nv-l

Re: Discovery Problem

1999-02-16 08:41:31
Subject: Re: Discovery Problem
From: John Creasey <creasey AT OZEMAIL.COM DOT AU>
To: nv-l AT lists.tivoli DOT com
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 00:41:31 +1100
Thanks for such a fast reply.
Sad news though. We have only just moved to 5.1 and I thought
5.0 was buggy enough.

What exactly do you mean by map maintenance?
Is that the same as ovtopofix?

regards,
John.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
> [mailto:NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU]On Behalf Of Michael Trzebiatowski
> Sent: Wednesday, 17 February 1999 00:19
> To: NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: Discovery Problem
>
>
>      Yes, I've seen this problem with Netview 5.1 for AIX.
> We have worked
>      with Tivoli to get some efixes for this.  There is
> actually a series
>      of problems that can be seen.  First being the partial
> discovery as
>      you have indicated below; second being the fact that the
> object not
>      being placed onto the maps.  And if you look in the
> NETTL log, you
>      will probably notice some database failure errors.
>
>      As I said Tivoli has come up with efixes for the database failure
>      errors and the partial discovery; they are still working
> on the fix
>      for the object not being placed on the map.  An
> alternative for this
>      one is to run map maintenance after discovering the object.
>
>      Michael Trzebiatowski.
>
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> Subject: Re: Discovery Problem
> Author:  creasey (creasey AT OZEMAIL.COM DOT AU) at unix,mime
> Date:    2/16/99 5:22 AM
>
>
> Has anyone seen a problem like this?
> I added a node today using the loadhosts command.
> It added normally stating the usual 1 node added,
> 1 interface added.  However the node does not apear
> on the maps and if I do an ovtopodump of it nothing
> is printed.  I can find it if I search the entire ovtopodump
> -rl file, but it has no interfaces and is listed as not
> snmp enabled.
>
> I can't find any reason for this.  The node snmpwalk's fine
> and there are no duplicated ip addresses that I can discover.
>
> Anyone seen a similar problem or have any suggestions?
> John Creasey.
>

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