I expected some NetView for NT users to respond, but perhaps they are as
confused by your original note as I am.
First, when you say these local admins only want to give you read access, what
do you mean? NetView and MLM do not alter the SNMP parms or any others on the
boxes they monitor. We don't snmpset anything. So I don't understand that
concern. Maybe I just don't understand the situation.
Second, you can have both worlds with NetView NT so long as you and the local
guys can work together somewhat. NetView NT 5.1.1 has a special feature called
"attended MLM" where you install both MLM and NetView for NT on the same box.
The MLM reports to the upstream central site just as he otherwise would, but
NetView for NT is available as a local interface for those folks on site. The
"attended" MLM midmand and netmon work out a kind of agreement as to who polls
what. This prevents duplicate SNMP traffic as much as possible. And local
visibility makes your field folks a lot more comfortable. As long as they
agree not to change it once you get it working, I think you can co-exist just
But NetView does not offer you a technical solution to a political problem, so
they will still have to buy into whatever you want to do.
Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
"Chance, Larry" <lchance AT SFBCIC DOT COM> on 06/21/99 05:14:17 PM
Please respond to Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView
<NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU>
To: NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU
cc: (bcc: James Shanks/Tivoli Systems)
Subject: Need advice - Use MLM or separate license of Netview for NT
I am about to install and set up Netview for NT. We will have <> 2,000
nodes throughout the WAN.
I have one state (and maybe others to come later) where the local
Administrator wants their own copy of Netview for NT and
wants to give me (the Home Office) READ ONLY for their devices. This has
the potential of having several copies of Netview for NT running
on the WAN. I see a tremendous amount of uncontrolled SNMP traffic in
I prefer to use MLM with seed files at the state locations and attempt to
manage the SNMP network traffic and nodes through a central set of
configuration files for those states. I can not see how we can benefit from
threshold, analysis, .etc if we do not use the top-level manager features of
Does anyone see any benefits of using separate copies of Netview running on
the WAN over using MLM?
Has anyone had experience with this same setup?
lchance AT sfbcic DOT com <mailto:lchance AT sfbcic DOT com>