We have encountered a situation where Netview is
auto-deleting objects from its database almost immediately after discovering
them.
This only appears to happen with Unix servers
running Solaris 2.8; it's not a problem with our NT servers or with older
versions of Solaris.
Here's our configuration:
(1) We're running Netview v6.0 on Solaris
2.6.
(2) Netmon is configured to use a
seedfile that contains a statement: !@oid 0 to block auto-discovery of devices
that are not running SNMP -- mainly workstations.
(3) Netview SNMP configuration does not have any
specific or wildcard overrides in terms of this issue. It uses a default
community string that is configured on all routers and switches, which *do*
get autodiscovered as expected.
(4) NT servers run an SNMP service but do not use
the default community string. These devices are not
auto-discovered. To manage these devices, we add their IP address to the
seedfile once they are active on the network. This works OK - once
discovered, they stay managed.
(5)Unix servers running older versions of Solaris
(i.e. 2.6) work the same way as NT; these servers do not run an SNMP daemon
normally.
The problem is with Unix Servers running 2.8.
These do not use the default community string defined to Netview. When
we add the IP address to the seedfile, they do not get discovered. When
we explicitly add them in the read/write map, they initially get discovered
but get auto-deleted 5 minutes later, apparently as part of the next polling
cycle. The only way to successfully get Netview to manage these servers
(using the non-default community string), is to add a specific override in the
Netview SNMP configuration. We could also get around the problem by
configuring netmon with the "-h" alternate community string option, but have
rejected this solution since it would need to be left in place most of the
time and adds to Netview's overhead.
We would expect this "auto-delete feature" of
Netview to at least act in a consistent manner, affecting both NT and Unix
servers alike.
Before opening a problem with support, we first
just wanted to see if anyone out there has seen this or can offer an
explanation.
Thanks!!
Mark Lemire
Sr.
Consultant
John Hancock Financial
Services