| 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 |
I am going to a customer site this week to upgrade an earlier version
of DECMCC V1.1 to the current version V1.3. On speaking with another
engineer who did this a little while back he lost all his information
that had previously been registered. This was not much of problem as
it only had a few concentrators and bridges. However I know there are
a few hundred devices registered on the system I am to upgrade. It
would be so much easier to go direct from 1.1 to 1.3 but are there any
known problems with this. Is it safer to go via V1.2?
John Davies
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5032.1 | TOOK::PURRETTA | Mon May 10 1993 14:36 | 8 | ||
As of DECmcc v1.2.3, DECnet/OSI nodes are registered along with
their child modules to speed up the look-into operation from the map.
So in OSI terms, prior to V1.2.3 when you registered NODE .X, just
node .X (and synonym) was placed in DNS. Now the registration FM
will query the node abount all direct children and if the node supports
it, it'll be registered as well (i.e. ROUTING, SESSION CONTROL, HDLC)
I believe SNMP does this too. Read the release notes for more info.
| |||||
| 5032.2 | Go direct if you are careful | SMAC10::DAVIES | Tue May 18 1993 18:39 | 5 | |
Well I went via V1.2 to be safe but reading the release notes and from
experience I could have just as easily gone direct from V1.1 to V1.3.
Just have to remember to cope with SNMP devices and the alarms.
John Davies
| |||||