Conference netcad::hub_mgnt

24.0. "Wished for features" by EMDS::SEAVER (LENAC Net Mgnt Mktg 223-4573) Fri Jan 24 1992 23:48

    Let me know if you want to add times to this list.
    
24 January 92 wish.lis
WISH LIST for Management of the DEChub 90

DECagent- ****************************************************************

proxy for DECserver 200,5** 		Networld attendees, ANCs
   (& bridges)				Toys, Ewalt

repeater port redundancy thru         	Meisner
   switching to second port if
   prob on first one

trap and alarm on port address 		Meisner (compet), Coopers
  change (new device plugged in)

SLIP for dial in SNMP management	ANCs, Meisner, Koole- not worth extra
  would allow dial in hub view		$
  esp with WAN failures

bootP (&TFTP) in ROM for down line	Meisner (compet), Bill Anderson
  load new firmware

support for other non-DEC thru out	Meisner 
  of band when LAN unreachable    	koole-would sell on redundancy
  ? need TELNET ?? need SLIP

secure SNMP- only specified managers	Gassman says we have until 7/92
  can manage a given agent		  Meisner

repeater management w/out bridge
  (no mapping of MAC address to ports)
-in agent
_in router				Bill Anderson-remote branch offices

down line loadable proxies for		Meisner
  SNA, OSI, CMIP

pins on DS90* to recognize slot		Stromseth- deficiency (fixed in 90TL)

RMON agent as well as a proxy agent 	Meisner

Polling consolidation (~Syn NICE)	Meisner



MS-DOS- ********************************************************************

Disk with MOP/CC free with every	Every hub has poor man's TSM. Stromseth
  bridge and hub sold (& TS??)		% of cust w no VAX, Compete w TSM?
					handle other than TS??? Payne
					Need w out of band??  

moving around- to other devices in	ANC
  other hubs, find all bridges

global cut and paste on data base	ANC
  ??will history file do?

MCC access to its database		Coopers 5 Nov 91 memo- dist mgnt

auto inventory (~Novell)		Inventory and compatibility of new
					  software- see PC Week 24 Oct p99-

auto discovery				Syn and Cable have on DOS

compile other vendors MIBs and		Meisner
  support views of their hubs

Add IPX					Lloyd Lassiter (DEC) 404-343-1068 for 
					  BP who has 18K PCs

OS 2 port				Raj in Singapore is seeing competition





MCC- *************************************************************************

handle proxying/ children		AGREED GOAL                            

"show" DOS database			Use DOS as "distributed director"

Hub view similar to MSU			AGREED GOAL         



ALL SOFTWARE ****************************************************************

Common look and feel of all 3 systems	match competitive offerings

Manage other hubs graphically 		Competitive strength

RMON network monitor			New functionality for diagnose 
					 probs

customizable user terminal server	Miles/ ANCs
  interface


From:	MEMIT::FORREST      "Jack @MLO3-3 Pole 10b - 223-2945" 19-DEC-1991 10:10:29.16
To:	BEACHN::anderson
CC:	emds::seaver
Subj:	RE: PID Information

Bill, did you or someone in your office get the Field Test Site Selection 
Questionaire from Joni Silveria? 

I don't have a better date on when the SNMP agent would directly manage 
the repeaters in a hub. Before the end of '92 still seems quite doable 
though. You probably noticed in the PID that we are coming out with a 
couple of routers. We are also looking into the possibility of having 
the router directly manage the repeaters in the same backplane. Thus in 
a configuration with only repeaters and a router, you would not need 
either the bridge or the SNMP agent module. This may not be in the 1st 
router, but should make it into the 2nd. The 2nd router should have 
all of the capabilities of the current Cisco product, and still plug 
into the hub.

On another note, Cabletron and SynOptics require the "retiming" module 
in every hub. They have combined retiming and SNMP Agent onto one board.
The price for the combination retiming/SNMP agent is higher than for 
our 2 module bridge/SNMP Agent. Also, if this board fails, all traffic 
in the hub comes to a halt; it is a single point of failure. Each of our 
repeater cards is a full repeater, each incorporating retiming between every 
port, so there is no single point of failure for all users other than the 
power supply.

I'll put down TFTP on the wish list for the 2nd pass firmware. But there 
may be a way to do it today without visiting the site. Do they have a 
DECnet node on each site? They could remotely copy the image to a local 
host and invoke the download via Telnet or Set Host to that system.

Thanks for the feedback,
jack

Jack,

I delivered the Hub PID to one of our corporate accounts (Tektronix)
and I would like to give you the feed back that I received from them,
along with some of their questions.

Background:

Tektronix is currently looking at redesigning their remote field
offices throughout the United States.  They currently have a total of
35-40 offices that they would like to network by installing intelligent
hubs at each of the remote sites.  Each of these sites will be
networked together by TCP/IP using CISCO routers.  The time frame for
deployment is around mid 1992 with testing currently underway.

Issues:

Overall Tek liked our HUB products and our direction with SNMP, but got
disturbed when they realized that a bridge was required to manage the
hub based repeaters  (they are only looking at repeaters in the hub,
they are replacing all of the terminals with PC's).  They understood
the benefit of the bridge to isolate the repeaters from the backbone
but at the majority of their remote locations the hub was going to be
their backbone.  Matter of fact some of their sites would only have 1 -
2 repeaters.  This greatly increased the cost of the solution requiring
the SNMP agent and a bridge.

In the PID we gave a time frame of end of '92 for enhancements to the
SNMP agent to directly manage the hub based repeaters.  Do we happen to
have a firmer date to employ this.  If we plan on implementing this
sooner, they may hold off with the agent and deploy the systems without
an SNMP agent until it was available.  If we are not able to answer
this question it is very doubtful that they would be willing to go with
our products.  We have convinced them to use the bridge approach for
testing and evaluation purposes (They currently are being nominated for
the SNMP agent field test).  If we cannot give them a satisfactory
answer they will plan on using another vendor (synoptics, cabletron,
etc...).  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

This discussion now leads into the second question they posed.  When it
is time to upgrade the SNMP agents, how will it be done?  Their concern
is that each of the 40 sites will need to be visited to upgrade the
software.  They would like the ability to use TFTP (since they have an
IP network) to upgrade the agents.  Management from a single site is
very important to them.

Thanks for your help.  Please feel free to call me to discuss this further.

Bill Anderson
Network Specialist
Portland OR
DTN 547-3312