Re: [nv-l] Ruleset + up event.

2004-09-22 09:58:49
Subject: Re: [nv-l] Ruleset + up event.
From: Tom Hallberg <gimli AT hhcrew DOT tk>
To: nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:36:40 +0200 (CEST)
Thank you, then I probably will go for the script file or ask my TEC
friend to clear it there.


On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, James Shanks wrote:

> What you see is what you get, Tom.
> If you want to pass a Router Up event, then you have to do it explicitly.
> The logic you are saying you want here is much more complicated than just
> a simple reset-on-match.   What you have just said is that you want the
> Router Down held for just five minutes and then passed to TEC if no Router
> Up.  And then you want something to "remember" that you passed this Router
> Down, and pass a matching Router up for time period much later.   Well, a
> simple ruleset cannot do that.  So you have to design something else more
> sophisticated.
> When you design a custom ruleset for TEC, you and the TEC guy have to work
> together.  He can code rules on his end, just as you can.   I don't see
> why you cannot send all Router Up events to TEC as harmless and let a TEC
> rule over there match them to any open Router Downs, and if there are none
> them close them.  Or let the operator close them.  If he sees them, then
> clearly there was no match so they no longer matter, right?
> If you have to do this in NetView, then I think you'd have to do something
> like this.  You have to keep a record somewhere of Router Down events you
> sent to TEC, and query that list when a Router Up comes in.  One way them
> would be create a file, add the router name to it when you send the event
> TEC (use an action node for that), and then query it in an inline action
> script when the Router Up comes in, and if there is a match, then delete
> the name from the list and send the Router Up.  An alternative would be to
> Set and Query Database fields on the router objects in the database .  You
> can create your own field or use CorrState1 - 4.  You set the field to
> indicate that you sent the trap, then you could query it when the Router
> Up came in and take action that way.   Then clear the field.   You get the
> idea, I'm sure
> James Shanks
> Level 3 Support  for Tivoli NetView for UNIX and Windows
> Tivoli Software / IBM Software Group
> Tom Hallberg <gimli AT hhcrew DOT tk>
> Sent by: owner-nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com
> 09/22/2004 03:41 AM
> Please respond to
> nv-l
> To
> nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com
> cc
> Subject
> [nv-l] Ruleset + up event.
> Hi
> I got some ruleset design problem. For the moment I got first a "Trap
> Settings" (for Router down events), then a "Inline Action" to check that
> its one of the routers I want to have status check on. After that I have a
> "Reset on Match" because I also take in Router up events so I can reset on
> match within 5 mins. But the problem is that if a router goes down, and if
> it have been down for more then 5 min then it will pass that down event to
> TEC. And let say now that the router when up again, so we got a Router up
> event. But that up event will not pass to our TEC. So are there any
> Templets that can handle the problem about sending onlye one up event when
> there have been a down event passed to TEC. Or do I have to make a new
> Inline Action to take care about that up event that comes after 5 min?
> The TEC guy dont want to have all up events. Because the net is quite big.
> Thank you
> //Tom

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