[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
| Title: | DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT. |
| Notice: | Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187 |
| Moderator: | TAEC::BEROUD |
|
| Created: | Mon Aug 21 1989 |
| Last Modified: | Wed Jun 04 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 6497 |
| Total number of notes: | 27359 |
1439.0. "Iconic Map WAN Notification - Help!" by WLW::ZIGLER (Tom Zigler DTN:432-7541) Tue Sep 03 1991 22:47
Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that the DECmcc BMS V1.1 software
is running at a central location, say Cincinnati, Ohio. The Cincinnati
site is linked via multiprotocol routers to two other remote sites, say
Colorado and Alabama, each with their own DECmcc BMS V1.1 software
monitoring DEC LAN Bridge 150s on their respective local LANs. When an
alarm fires from, say, a DEC LAN Bridge 150 on the LAN in Alabama, the
customer wants to know if he can do the following from the DECmcc BMS
iconic map interface running at Cincinnati:
1) DECmcc BMS software in Atlanta receives an alarm from a DEC LAN
Bridge 150.
2) DECmcc BMS software in Cincinnati receives notification from DECmcc
BMS software in Atlanta about the bridge problem.
3) The "Atlanta Domain" icon on the Cincinnati iconic map turns red.
4) From the iconic map in Cincinnati, the network manager opens the
"Atlanta Domain" to determine what device on the Atlanta LAN caused the
problem (which in this case is the DEC LAN Bridge 150), "clicks" on the
DEC LAN Bridge 150, and displays the detailed information from the
alarm.
The crux of the problem seems to be the fact that the DECmcc BMS
software must also run at the Alabama and Colorado sites to monitor the
non-routable DEC LAN Bridge 150 protocol for alarm polling, rather than
monitor the DEC Lan Bridge 150 directly from the Cincinnati DECmcc BMS
software.
I had explored the idea of driving the iconic map display from Alabama
back to the Cincinnati iconic map via DECwindows/DECnet. However, since
I would also need to do the same thing for the Colorado DECmcc BMS site,
I would then have separate windows rather than one backdrop of the U.S.
at Cincinnati with an "Atlanta" domain and "Colorado" domain showing on the
same iconic map.
Is there any way to accomplish all of the above, or provide some kind of
workaround for the customer? If not, are the limitations in the
above scenario going to be addressed in some future release of DECmcc BMS?
I need definite feedback concerning the above requirement before Friday
of this week.
Can anyone help? Please advise.
\Thanks in Advance
| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1439.1 | Distributed DECmcc should solve your problem. | BSYBEE::EGOLF | John C. Egolf LKG2-2/T02 x226-7874 | Wed Sep 04 1991 09:00 | 26 |
| Tom,
The problem you describe is exactly what "Distributed DECmcc"
is aimed at solving.
In V1.1 of DECmcc, without writing some type of AM, I don't see
any want to manage bridges remotely.
In V1.2 we will have something called a Data Collector AM that
would help, but not completely solve the problem. The remote
system could send an alarm to the central system. The central
system could have a message and an icon turn color indicating a
problem, but you still wouldn't be able to manage the remote
bridge from the central system.
In V2.0, distribution will allow you to do what you are needing
to do. You can have a central system, and a DECmcc system (or
pieces of it) remotly. "Logically", the remote bridge AM will
be apiece of the central system. You will be able to manage
the bridge "from anywhere" as is you were there.
Current plans (not committments) are to have V2.0 shipping
before the end of next calander year (with more than just
distribution, of course).
JCE
|