T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
2296.1 | | YAHEY::BOSE | | Tue Feb 11 1992 17:19 | 22 |
|
I tried exactly what you did, but on only three hosts, one of which
was down. When the host is unreachable, the alarm fires with
severity critical, while when the host is reachable, no alarm is
fired. I guess this is the sort of behaviour you have been expecting
all along.
Regarding your questions about "ping" implementation, the timeout
period is hard-coded to be 30 secs and there are no retries. This
large timeout period, along with the fact that only one thread is
allowed to do a ping at any point of time, might explain why your
42 alarm rules do not work correctly.
The ping timeout period should be a settable attribute and a QAR
has been filed against the SNMP AM regarding this (MCC_INTERNAL
QAR #02282). I am also looking into the possibility of allowing
multiple threads to send ICMP echo requests at the same time. Thank
you for pointing out this problem.
Rahul.
|
2296.2 | Is the main problem really QARed? | ZUR01::FUEGLISTER | Roland Fueglister, 760-2498 | Tue Feb 18 1992 11:56 | 55 |
| -< PING alarm problem must be QARed !! >-
Regarding .1
/I am also looking into the possibility of allowing/
/multiple threads to send ICMP echo requests at the same time./
According to the DECmcc V1.2 Features and Functions Description from John Egolf
PING support is added for reachability testing/alarming.
I have already two customers which intend to set up their alarm environment
with this PING capability.
Regarding .0 not only alarming doesn't work but ...
/On the Iconic Map almost nothing works if alarming is running in the/
/background./
//
/The following IMPM commands are just hanging:/
/ show snmp IP_HOST status/
/ show snmp IP_HOST identifiers/
//
/The following commands give the response "No response from entity" back:/
/ show snmp IP_HOST counter/
/ show snmp IP_HOST characteristics/
I'm just using one of the basic functionalities of DECmcc, i.e. Alarming with
41 ipReachability rules, and DECmcc is not anymore usable!!
This problem must get a highest priority QAR!!
I agree with you that with only three rules enabled everything works perfect; I
have tried it out.
Regarding .1
/ I tried exactly what you did, but on only three hosts, one of which/
/ was down. When the host is unreachable, the alarm fires with /
/ severity critical, while when the host is reachable, no alarm is/
/ fired. I guess this is the sort of behaviour you have been expecting/
/ all along./
I did the following for testing IP host reachable/unreachable:
I just disconnected the tranceiver cable from a IP host. In this case, the
ipReachability rule cannot access the entity and should generate an
exception, i.e severity equal to indeterminate.
But I get the same result as you --> the alarm rule fires with severity
critical.
The question is still remaining: Should there be a rule exception if the entity
is not reachable?
Roland
|
2296.3 | | TOOK::R_SPENCE | Nets don't fail me now... | Tue Feb 18 1992 14:07 | 11 |
| How often are you testing each of the 40 rules?
It seems to me (my opinion here) that if you are testing for
reachability and you specify "Severity=Critical" and it is unreachable,
then you are getting what you asked for. This seems to be a special
case of alarms to me.
If I need info FROM the entity and I can't reach it, then it should be
an exception.
s/rob
|
2296.4 | Changes coming in next release. | DANZO::CARR | | Tue Feb 18 1992 16:19 | 14 |
| Roland,
The following changes have been made and will be available in the next
release (FT update or SSB).
The default timeout value for ICMP Echo has been changed from 30 seconds
to 5 seconds. A new characteristic attribute has been added to the TCPIP_AM
child entity of MCC, ICMP Timeout. This is a settable attribute. Also,
the FT software forced a single thread of execution through PING code in the AM.
This is no longer the case. This code is now multi-threaded. These changes
should solve the problem you are having.
Dan
|