[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

5786.0. "%MCC-E-NOENTITY, after successful registration." by PLUNDR::LOWEG (WANTED!! A modern day Robin Hood.) Thu Dec 16 1993 12:44

        Ultrix V4.3a MCC V1.3 DNS V2.0 DECnet/OSI V5.1

	Problems again with the consistency of registering entities in a
	DNS environment. This is causing a major problem currently.

	The following is an extract of the script that created 10 remote 
	stations, all registered successfully. When they were registered
	the customer attempted to show them but couldn't. The following is 
	a log of what has happened since. The customer desperately needs
 	to get this runningso he can test the RAD software.
	My comments are enclosed in **   **.

**This is the file gary1**
	REGISTER REMOTE_STATION .RAD.CZRB001 ADDRESS=00-00-b0-00-19-20, -
	FUNCTIONS SUPPORTED=ENETV2_ONLY, - 
	SERVER NAME .UNIX.CZDZ11, -
	SERVER DEVICE=ln0, -
	STATION TYPE= RAD BRIDGE

**This is the session log**
	# manage
	DECmcc (V1.3.0)
	MCC> do gary1

	Remote_Station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	AT 1993-12-16-16:21:34.273

	Registration Successful
	MCC> show remote_station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	Using default ALL IDENTIFIERS

	Remote_Station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	AT 1993-12-16-16:21:42.102 Identifiers

        Examination of attributes shows:
					Name    = BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
					address = 00-00-b0-00-19-20
**Same show command immediately after**
	MCC> show remote_station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	Using default ALL IDENTIFIERS
	%MCC-E-NOENTITY, no corresponding entity instance exists

**Checked DNS and it was registered as an object ok**
**Then went onto to deregister and try again**
	MCC> dereg rem .rad.czrb001

	Remote_Station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	AT 1993-12-16-16:22:20.109

	Derigistration Successful
**Checked in dnscp and the object had gone**
	MCC> do gary1
        Remote_Station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
        AT 1993-12-16-16:21:34.273

        Registration Successful
**This time use all att with show command with the following result**
	MCC> show remote_station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001 all att

	show remote_station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	AT 1993-12-16-17:22:38.484 All Attributes

        Examination of attributes shows:
                                        Name    = BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
                                        address = 00-00-b0-00-19-20
        %MCC-E-NOENTITY, no corresponding entity instance exists
	MCC> dir remote_station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
	
	remote_station BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001
        AT 1993-12-16-17:23:38.484

	Directory successful
                                        Name    = BT_MCC:.RAD.CZRB001


	Going through this deregistration, registration and show consistently
	displays the same result, although it is worthy to note that a show
	will "all att" fails on the first run through and a show on its own
	will work once and fail on a second request to show. As you can see
	at the bottom the directory works ok.

	Anyone know what is going on..

	Gary Lowe Warrington CSC Nets & Comms. 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
5786.1Module from ASSETS library?BIKINI::KRAUSEEuropean NewProductEngineer for MCCFri Dec 17 1993 05:2111
>        REGISTER REMOTE_STATION .RAD.CZRB001 ADDRESS=00-00-b0-00-19-20, -

The entity class Remote_Station is not part of MCCBMS. As far as I know
it comes with the UDM (UNIX Distributed Management), a bunch of MCC
modules developed in the UK and sold as an ASSETS tool. And I'm not sure 
if they at all support it under MCC V1.3. If you can't reproduce the 
problem with another entity class (from the standard kit) you should 
refer the call to the local office, which is in charge of supporting 
ASSETS.

*Robert
5786.2Thanks Robert..PLUNDR::LOWEGWANTED!! A modern day Robin Hood.Fri Dec 17 1993 08:256
    
    Thankyou for your quick reply Robert. Yes you are correct it an UDM
    module and I have passed it on to the UDM group at Warrington and they 
    are looking into it.
    
    Gary Lowe CSC Warrington.