| 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 |
Hello,
I have two questions regarding the DECmcc alarm/event logger.
I would be very grateful if someone could provide me with an answer.
Thank you,
Maurice.
HW: VAX 6430
SW: VMS 5.5
DECmcc V1.1
QUESTIONS
=========
1. - We have defined the remote and local sink so that we can receive/
handle event (among which we pass the "Counters Zeroed" event: 0.9)
- The remote sink node is the same as the local sink node; i.e. the
node which DECmcc is installed on (TPLAB/MONITOR).
- I can create an alarm rule for that node (from iconic map:
- rule expression 4
- entity NODE4 TPLAB
- Event name "Counters Zeroed")
- I can create an alarm rule for a circuit of that node (from iconic map:
- rule expression 4
- entity NODE4 TPLAB CIRCUIT BNA-0
- Event name "Counters Zeroed")
- I can also issue the directive for the node
GETEVENT NODE4 TPLAB Counters Zeroed, AT START...
- I can also issue the directive for of that node
GETEVENT NODE4 TPLAB CIRCUIT BNA-0 Counters Zeroed, AT START...
- If I Zero the circuit BNA-0 for the node TPLAB, I get the appropriate
alarm notification and the GETEVENT displays the event that occured,
proving that the event is properly passed and captured.
- If I Zero the node TPLAB, I DO NOT get the appropriate alarm notification
and the GETEVENT DOES NOT display the event that occured.
Question: what is the difference of the handling the same event (0.9) for
a node and a circuit of that node ? Is it a Decnet/DECmcc
bug or supported feature and is ther a DECnet/DECmcc patch
or work=around
2. - The DECmcc DECnet Phase IV Access Module Use states (p D-2) the
GETEVENT directive must be issued with an AT qualifier (unless the
directive obtains only the next occurence of a requested event).
Question: what is the exact AT qualifier to be used so that no
event is lost. I tried
"AT START = (start-time) EVERY 00:01:00" but if I zero the
the counters twice in a minute, GETEVENT only captures the
first event occurence.
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2254.1 | Problem 2 solved | TOOK::ORENSTEIN | Mon Feb 03 1992 14:05 | 21 | |
Hi
Issue #2 does look like a documentation error. It is filed as QAR 2248
in the MCC_INTERNAL QAR system. The docementation should say that the
GETEVENT should be issued with the FOR DURATION qualifier.
This will gather events for the specified duration of time.
Syntax:
GETEVENT NODE foo <some event>, FOR DURATION = (10:00)
Get the event over the next 10 hours.
Issue #1 is not an ALARMS issue. I will see that an appropriate person
answers your note.
aud...
| |||||
| 2254.2 | remote node child entity receives counters zeroed event | TOOK::CALLANDER | MCC = My Constant Companion | Tue Feb 11 1992 11:51 | 4 |
zeroing counters on the local node, still reports them against the
REMOTE NODE child entity. The rule as you have it stated shows
the rule is on the parent entity.
| |||||
| 2254.3 | OK.. But I do not understand | BIS1::COLLEYE | Wed Feb 12 1992 03:54 | 16 | |
Thank you very much for your solution... It works.
But I do not understand why the event is reported on the remote entity
rather than on the global entity (on which the event has been
generated). Is it explained somewhere in the Alarm FM use ?
I would be very grateful if you could explain me or provide me
with a documentation pointer.
The reason of my question is that: is this solution applicable for
the "Counters Zeroed" event or for all the NODE4 events ?
In advance thank you for your reply.
Maurice.
| |||||
| 2254.4 | DNA4 defines events, not rules | TOOK::CALLANDER | MCC = My Constant Companion | Wed Feb 26 1992 10:21 | 18 |
This should be documented in the DNA4 manual. It is the
decnet phase 4 implmentation that determines how/where
events are reported.
The returning of the event against the remote node child entity has
nothing to do with alarms. But....since architectures/implementations
don't always meet mangement needs/expectations; for this reason
we have added the targetting functions. do the following to get the
visible results that you are interested in.
ASSIGN TARGET DOMAIN name EVENT SOURCE="DOMAIN name RULE name",
EVENT NAME = "ANY NOTIFICATION EVENT",
MANAGED OBJECT = "NODE4 #1 REMOTE NODE #2",
TARGET ENTITY = "NODE4 #2"
Jill
| |||||