Yes, definitly try that too. I tried the OID's well over a year ago. Its
likely
that a patch would have resolved this problem by now. (when I tried it, it
seemed
that if you used OID's , netmon ignored your negative address ranges)
Good luck!
Art DeBuigny
Bank of America Network Operations
debuigny AT dallas DOT net
Leslie Clark wrote:
> My experience with this has been different. If you also have the negative
> address range, you do NOT get stub objects for nodes in those ranges.
> The stubs are created for things that might change into something that
> is supposed to be discovered, and those stubs are repolled periodically.
> Nodes with addresses in the excluded range are not going to change,
> so no stubs are created.
>
> If you have NO address exclusion, and use positive oids, then yes, every
> address discovered will result in a stub that gets checked daily to see if
> it's oid has changed to something acceptable.
>
> Cordially,
>
> Leslie A. Clark
> IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking
> Detroit
>
> ================================================================================
> Jim;
>
> Be very careful in using OID's in your seed file. When an OID is contained
> in a
> seed file, NetView will create a stub object in your database for EACH and
> EVERY
> device it finds on your network. These objects are not real objects, but a
> sort
> of a marker telling NetView not to consider that device again in
> autodiscovery.
> Still, depending on the size of your network, you are talking about a very
> huge
> database just to keep all those stubs lying around.
>
> If your going to use OID's, you might as well use only OID's. That way,
> you
> will only discover the OID's in your seed file, and you don't have to worry
> about IP address ranges at all.
>
> But what I would do is try and document your hubs and add them manually
> using
> the loadhosts command. We have found that if you can't define a range of
> ip
> addresses for a particular type of object, it is a big hassle trying to
> keep the
> NetView database clean of extraneous devices.
>
> Art DeBuigny
> Bank of America Network Operations
> debuigny AT dallas DOT net
> art.debuigny AT bankofamerica DOT com
>
> "Brunke, Jim (FUSA)" wrote:
>
> > We are building a Netview server which will exclusively manage routers,
> > switches and hubs on our network - and I need some advice on the best way
> to
> > setup for initial discovery.
> >
> > We have build a seedfile which contains an entry for each our routers &
> > switches. The first 5 address of a subnet is reserved for router
> interfaces
> > so we limit discovery of other nodes in the network (servers and
> > workstations) by excluding all other addresses, ie:
> >
> > !167.85.*.6-254
> > !168.118.*.6-254
> >
> > One problem is that we do not have a well defined list of IP addresses
> for
> > all of the hubs on the network. They are a combination of Cisco and Bay
> > hubs. Could I also add two @OID entries into the seedfile to discover
> these
> > nodes? I know if you list an snmp reachable IP address in the seedfile,
> it
> > will ignore the ! range exclusion and discover the node. Does the @OID
> work
> > similarly?
> >
> > Thanks, in advance
|
