Conference azur::mcc

    
    The DECnet Phase 5 AM is alive and reasonably healthy.
    
    It is available on the Ultrix kit that was announced in here and is
    part of the kit.
    
    Be warned that the available dictionary for the DNA5 AM doesn't reflect
    any changes made to Phase V since about this time last year -- the V1.1
    MCC product froze, no changes were attempted through the Ultrix V1.1
    work.
    
    With the V1.2 field test of DECmcc, you'll see a dictionary that is
    much more robust, and reflects this significant body of work.
    
    -JIm Carey
    
    P.S. The DNA5 AM is part of the DECmcc Director, and also part of the 
    DECmcc BMS kit, so if you installed DECmcc, you have it, in one version
    or another.
    

    Jim ,
    
    do we have any idea of the potential modification made by Phase V 
    group ? 
    
    	The reason why I ask this comes from the fact that we plan in
    Europe to 'push' the Free DECmcc Director package in order to 
    manage Phase IV and V in the same and consistent way .
    
    	I've noticed during the Last Euroepan DECUS symposium that 
    registering a Phase V node that is not in the same DNS Name space
    is not a trivial stuff , and we had some values that weren't
    returned from Phase V nodes ...
    
    	Regards .
    
    MaRc 
    
    	

    Hi, guys,
    
    reading that MCC V1.2 does not use DECdns but BMD (?) I find this a
    possible explanation in having problems to register Phase V nodes.
    
    My first attempt was to register the system - where mcc runs on - as an
    SNMP entity - successful. 
    This system is running ULTRIX V4.2, DECnet/ULTRIX V5.0 (SSB kit).
    Then I tried to register the same system as a Phase V ES using its 
    DECdns fullname. After the message 'move mouse pointer to map ...',
    the clock symbol appeared, and nothing else happened. After 1 hour I 
    stopped DECmcc and restarted it, then trying to register another Phase V 
    system, again using the appropriate fullname. With the same result as 
    before: the registration seemed to work until the clock symbol on the 
    Iconicmap appeared.
    Both PhV systems have been available by means of PhV to PhV CMIP access, 
    as well as from Wave I systems. The Wave I systems are running
    DECmcc/BMS V1.1 and are able to register the PhV systems successfully.
      
    Did I miss something that needs to be done, to make mcc access DECdns
    to retrieve the address information for the system to be registered ?
    
    Is there any other documentation available, besides the release notes ?
    
    And I did not find a way to define a community name for the SNMP
    entities, so I depend on the 'public' one. Any hints where I may look for
    this item to be defined ?
    
    Any help appreciated,
    Klaus
    

    Hi guys,
    
    me again. I forgot to mention  that  I did (tried to) all registrations
    through the Iconicmap interface.
    Mcc seems to use DECdns to retrieve domain names successfully. But it
    turns out that the List Domain function has potential problems in
    returning all existing domains when I set the domain filter to *.
    The namespace has about 6 directories and not more than 10 DNA node
    objects in it. The number of domains was > 5 when mcc returned just 3.
    In spite of this minor problem it proves that mcc is actually able to
    scan through the namespace.
    
    Anyone able to clarify the relation between mcc V1.2 and DECdns ?
    
    Klaus

I can give you a partial answer.

The field test of DECmcc for ULTRIX V1.2 that is currently available
does not use DECdns at all for its namespace.  Instead, it uses local
DBM files.  However, since Phase V DECnet does use DNS, presumably
the phase V access module uses it at least indirectly.

It certainly should be possible to register a Phase V node from
the map.

Any comments, Jim?

The first step to localize an iconic map problem is to try it in FCL.
The iconic map does a  Register, Create and then a Create domain member commands.
Register does a Show Node command.   We do not have this combination of versions 
available to us today. 


Could you try a Show NODE foo all  Ident command?  To test DNA5 AM layer.

Then a Register Node Syno command?  To test Register FM layer.

Also Is the node you trying to reach a Phase V or a Phase IV?

What was fullname used?    

Al Moore	

    Thanks for your reply,
    
    to clarify the environment:
    
    The configuration is as follows:
    
    2 ULTRIX V4.2 DS5000-200 running DNU Phase V (5.0 SSB), 1 of them
    running BMS mccbmsmipst122, ie. T1.2
    3 VMS 5.4 VS3100 running Wave I (ssb) and DECmcc/BMS V1.1
    
    After the installation I could successfully register the BMS system as
    SNMP entity, but I failed to register it as PhV entity.
    SNMP entity name is 'KROETE', PhV entity name was '.THR.KROETE'
    The namespace was available at that time. All systems could
    successfully communicate with each other using DNA protocols.
    
    The next day, without changing anything on the BMS side, I was able
    to register the PhV entity .THR.KROETE and another system .RTO.INLEAF
    Both are now available as PhV entities. But I could not access the SNMP
    entity KROETE anymore: Internal Logic Error 29.
    TCP/IP was still properly configured, and the standard commands (ping,
    netstat, telnet) worked fine with KROETE as target.
    
    The only thing that I did then  was a reboot. Now I can 
    access SNMP KROETE and PHASEV .THR.KROETE, all options are available.
    
    I will restart from scratch on friday afternoon, ie. new ULTRIX system,
    new BMS installation. This should allow  to create logs of what is
    working and what is not. The state of the system is not well defined
    anymore, so I need to clean it up.
    
    Regards,
    Klaus
     
     
    
    
    

    Re .2
    
    There have been large changes in the DECnet Phase V entities as
    registered since a year ago. Probably a dozen new major modules, and a
    few hundred new attributes, lord knows how many new events and actions.
    So I would suspect that upgrading to V1.2 or whatever version of the
    Phase V AM that's up to date with the registry would be important.
    
    Fortunately, there's work underway to ensure that MCC MSL's are
    synchronized with the DSSR Registry of what EMA entities exist, and
    what their management interface is.
    
    				Mark

Re: .8,

>    So I would suspect that upgrading to V1.2 or whatever version of the
>    Phase V AM that's up to date with the registry would be important.

Mark, it sure sounds as if he's using the most current sw available to him.

Can anyone confirm that DECmcc V1.2 will include a (more) up-to-date version of
the PhV MSL?

_MaryEllen

    The MSLs have been updated for V1.2 FT.  Since I am only covering for
    the DECnet/OSI AM project leader this week, I can't tell you exactly
    where the cutoff of updates took place.  I do know that changes to the
    DECmcc MSLs were made up until fairly recently.  I'll review this with
    the project leader when he returns and see if we can't put an exact
    cutoff here in terms of date or registration update notice number.
    
    						Mike