[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference azur::mcc

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

4309.0. "DNS related questions" by ONTIME::BUGSBY::COBB (Writing from ALPHA AXP) Tue Dec 22 1992 20:32

    I have 2 DNS releated questions.
    
    1) Do I need to have MCC using a DNS namespace as the repository to 
    effectively manage Phase V entities?  I read somewhere in here that it
    is an advantage to have DNS when you are managing Phase V entities.
    If this true.  Can I use the local MIR?
    
    2) My current DNS server is a slow machine.  I am also currently using
    DNS as my repostiory.  Have no more than 100 entities registered and
    was thinking of converting to a local MIR.  Is there a procedure or
    tool to help with the conversion.  If not, does anyone have any good
    starting points?  I have heard good reports of the MIR with small
    databases.  Much better over the DNS space.  This MIR will not need
    to be shared by any other remote MCC.  
    
    Thanks for any answers,
    
    Bill 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
4309.1Suggestion, not restrictionTOOK::MINTZErik MintzWed Dec 23 1992 06:4810
Using DNS as the DECmcc namespace repostitory is usually convenient
for people running DECnet/OSI, since they usually are running DNS for
use with DECnet before they start with DECmcc.  However, there is nothing
to prevent using a local file namespace in DECmcc while using DECnet/OSI.

Have you checked the NOTED::MCC-TOOLS conference for a procedure to 
extract entities from the namespace?  If you don't find anthing there,
contact Rob (TOOK::R_SPENCE) Spence.

-- Erik
4309.2prob w/eventsCTHQ::WOODCOCKWed Dec 23 1992 08:5419
While using LOCAL_NS for MCC on an OSI node (using DNS) may not be a generic
problem I believe base note is looking for information about managing "other"
phase_v entities. I currently use a private_ns and have only bumped into one
'problem' managing phase_v entities of another NS....so far. Whether it's a 
private NS or your proposed local NS the same theories apply. When using 
phase_v event sinks the managed entity will send its fullname (from the other 
NS) with the event. The map notification process can't deal with this and in 
theory you can't get the event onto the map.

Theory doesn't always stop the persistent user though. I set up targetting
with wildcards and was able to get the event onto the map. The only problem is
that I can't 'see' the target info now when I do a DIRECTORY of TARGETs. This
appears to be a minor problem so the question goes to the engineers: Can we get
this fixed, although not originally supported??? Many, many, many, many users 
will want to manage phase_v entities from either the MIR or a different NS, 
this would be a big help for not restricting personal mngmt environments.

thanks,
brad...
4309.3ONTIME::BUGSBY::COBBWriting from ALPHA AXPWed Dec 23 1992 09:103
    Thanks to all who replied.  The help has been much appreciated.
    
    Bill