[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

5700.0. "Phase V and reachability (yes, I read the others!)" by OTOU28::T_ROSS (He who laughs, lasts best.) Sun Oct 31 1993 23:30

Situation urgent:

I'm trying to solve - quickly - a problem that does not seem to have a current 
solution: namely, how to get MCC to report a Phase V ID reachability change. 
I've read (literally) dozens of notes on the Phase V/DECNIS/MCC
scenario, and the summary looks like this:

1)   DECNIS reports all events in Phase V format

2)   A DECNIS node can be assigned a DNS-format name using the NCL RENAME 
     command.

3)   DECMCC's local MIR can use the DECNIS name (if specified in lowercase  
     on the DECNIS) to identify the DECNIS that generated the event.

4)   MCC's MIR *cannot* translate the Phase-V format (AA-00-04...) 
     id of the unreachable node - a DNS server is needed to do this.

5)   MCC *cannot* action the attributes (or arguments, or whatever the heck
     the proper title is) of the ID reachability change event directly - a 
     text message must be parsed & the results passed to the data collector.
     This generates some pretty heavy processing overhead for each event,
     and some headaches around co-ordinating files containing text with
     batch jobs to process them - and then cleaning up the text files
     afterwards.. 
    
My questions are:

1) Is this summary accurate? Some of those notes go back a year or more, 
   and I'm not entirely sure that I understood everything correctly.

2) Is there another, better, *certain* way to determine the reachability of 
   Phase IV and V end nodes and routers (L1 & L2) in the Phase V event   
   reporting lexicon?

3) What would it take to enhance MCC to handle the args to this *one* event
   so that none of the DCL jiggery-pokery is needed? Is this practical? 
    Possible?
 
4) Is there another workaround suitable for implementation on a MCC station 
   (model 4000/90) handling 300+ nodes over both LAN and WAN circuits?

 
    as ever, any & all responses greatly appreciated.
    
    ..Todd
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines