| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 940.1 | are you sure? | TOOK::CALLANDER | | Mon Apr 22 1991 09:39 | 6 |
| Did the alarms FM refuse the request, or tell you it couldn't get at
the data (something along the lines of unsupported verb/entity/partition)?
Right now the control FM is a gating factor in accessing access modules. This
problem is be addressed (I thought for V1.2; some one in the know...
Ruth? any light to shed when). For now stick to 15 and 16.
|
| 940.2 | The alarms FM can't enable the rule | DGOSW0::GUESDON | | Mon Apr 22 1991 11:28 | 4 |
| You're right, the alarms FM couldn't get the event (When I typed the
ENABLE directive, the Alarms FM accepted it but could not do it. The
status is "Unsupported v,e,p" when you enter SHOW MCC 0 ALARMS RULE
TEST ALL STATUS)
|
| 940.3 | control, or no control (;-\) | TOOK::KOHLS | Ruth Kohls | Mon Apr 22 1991 11:30 | 26 |
| >Right now the control FM is a gating factor in accessing access modules. This
>problem is be addressed (I thought for V1.2; some one in the know...
>Ruth? any light to shed when). For now stick to 15 and 16.
For Developers, the problem is addressed in two ways:
1)for now, and for VMS v1.1+, there is a
version of the Control FM with the latest directive-partition code combinations
which I will provide to people I know, or whose work I know of, or who come
with proper introductions. The directive and partition codes are in the latest
mcc_vea_def.xxx. (which is available in the same way--if you can't get it
for yourself, ask me.)
2) In the current Ultrix DECmcc build, and in the next series of VMS DECmcc
builds, you will no longer need Control_FM. MOST mcc_call_fm calls will
be automatically dispatched through the AM table if no dispatch entry is
found in the FM table. The exceptions are the directives the REGISTRATION FM
must control itself -- REGISTER, DEREGISTER, RENAME, ERASE. In the future,
the only time you will see that "unsupported combination ..." message will be
when the ultimate service provider (or Registration) is not enrolled.
I'm sorry, I don't know when the next series of VMS builds will begin.
For everyone:
"Control-fm-less" DECmcc will be available to all in v1.2.
|
| 940.4 | Hey! Be careful out there! | TOOK::GUERTIN | I do this for a living -- really | Mon Apr 22 1991 12:15 | 16 |
| RE:.0
Why do you need a different event partition? 99% of the time, Event
Partition Configuration is the correct event partition to use. If you
are getting or putting events for your own entity, use Event Partition
Configuration. If you are writing an FM, and you want to put/get
events for another entity (for example, Node4 entities). Then you
*cannot* use configuration, since that is what the DNA4 development team
is using, and you may conflict. In that case, you need your own Event
Partition. If you are requesting events, then you MUST make an
mcc_call_xxx() with the GetEvent VERB, and request the correct event
partition, as specified in the MRM (services offered). It is not at
all clear to me that your requirements are that of an FM getting and
putting events for someone elses entities. Is that the case?
-Matt.
|