| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 221.1 | Where's the bridge? | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | dsk dsk dsk (tsk tsk tsk) | Fri Apr 30 1993 14:11 | 9 |
| Remember that HUB 1 and HUB 2 need not only the thinwire coax but
the management cable.
In order for the DECagent in Hub 1 to manage Hub 3 or 4, they must
have a DECbridge 90 installed in 3 and 4. I assume that because of
the fiber, that Hub 3 and Hub 4 are in different buildings from Hub
1/2.
dave
|
| 221.2 | Please confirm.... | GIDDAY::KO | Anthony Ko @SNO - CSC Sydney Australia | Sun May 02 1993 21:46 | 42 |
| Dave,
First of all, thanks for the reply!
Are you saying that the configuration mentioned in .0 should require an extra
DECbridge 90 on each remote location OR should replace the existing DECrepeater
90/FAs by DECbridge 90/FLs (linking up to the DECrepeater 90/FL) on those two
remote locations?
i.e.
DEChub90 (Hub1 - Computer Room)
DECbridge90
DECagent90
:
:
DEChub90 (Hub3 - Model Room)
DEChub90 (Hub2 - Extended from Hub1) DECbridge90
DECrepeater90/FL <---------------------> DECrepeater90/FA
: <-----+ Fiber Optic DECrepeater90T
: | DECserver90TL
|
|
| (no DEChub90 : modules are
| connected by thinwire Ethernet ??
| Fiber Optic - Warehouse)
| DECbridge90
+---------------> DECrepeater90/FA
DECserver90TL
If my assumption (as in the above diagram) is correct, then all the modules in
Warehouse should be linked by thinwire Ethernet since no DEChub90 is available
in that location!...??
And the DECagent 90 in Hub1 communicates/manages remote modules via the remote
DECbridge 90s ??
Thanks once again!
Regards,
Anthony - CSC Sydney
|
| 221.3 | one more time with feeling | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | dsk dsk dsk (tsk tsk tsk) | Mon May 03 1993 02:15 | 17 |
|
Sorry, I was taking a quick break from an RFP so maybe not everything
came out crystal clear.
Hub 1 and Hub 2 are OK as they are extended and have the DECagent
and a DECbridge in them. Hub 3 can be managed by putting a DECbridge
90FL in it instead of the DECrepeater 90FA.
The warehouse, if it has no 90T repeaters doesn't matter anyways.
The DECserver 90TL is managed by console carrier, TSM or SNMP.
No bridge is required. If there is only 90TLs in the warehouse
then the DECrepeater 90FA is all you need. A DEWGF gets you nothing
especially since you have no hub and no repeaters there.
Hope this is clearer.
dave
|
| 221.4 | Another problem!
| GIDDAY::KO | Anthony Ko @SNO - CSC Sydney Australia | Wed May 05 1993 01:28 | 30 |
| Hi Dave,
Thanks for your clarification!
In fact, customer has just tried putting an extra DECbridge 90 or replacing
the DECrepeater 90FA by a DECbridge 90FL on Hub3. In both cases, the
DECagent 90 on the Hub1 is able to display the status/modules of those repeaters.
This implies that customer needs to have a bridge on Hub 3 in order to make the
DECagent in Hub 1 working.
Is it possible to put another DECagent 90 separately on Hub 3 instead of a
DECbridge 90 (or DECbridge 90FL). *NOTE* I saw one of the configuration diagrams
named "Distributed Backbone - No Bridge" that there was a DECagent 90 on
each DEChub 90 with DECrepeater 90T, DECrepeater 90(FL or FA) but NO DECbridge
90 at all. Was it mistyped/misprinted? If not, what is the differences to have
a separate DECagent 90 on each hub and a sole DECagent 90 for all the hub???
In addition, customer has encountered a problem on adding/displaying the
DECrepeater 90FA and DECserver 90TL on WAREHOUSE community via the DECagent 90.
I manually tries adding them via the DECagent console main menu. The SHOW MODULE
command does really display the DECserver 90TL right away. However, when I go
back to main menu and do a SHOW COMMUNITY, it says "COMMUNITY WAREHOUSE (no
module). SHOW MODULE now gives me the same reply. I tries connecting to the
DECserver 90TL, I can actually get on to the console of that server. Any ideas
and what things should I check?
Many thanks!
Regards,
Anthony
|
| 221.5 | Agent as HUB master? Not yet. | CGOS01::DMARLOWE | dsk dsk dsk (tsk tsk tsk) | Fri May 07 1993 11:53 | 24 |
| >>> Is it possible to put another DECagent 90 separately on Hub 3 instead of a
>>> DECbridge 90 (or DECbridge 90FL). *NOTE* I saw one of the configuration
>>> diagram named "Distributed Backbone - No Bridge" that there was a DECagent
>>> 90 on each DEChub 90 with DECrepeater 90T, DECrepeater 90(FL or FA) but
>>> NO DECbridge 90 at all.
You will be able to monitor a hub with only a DECagent 90 in the
hub and no bridge. That feature should be in the next release of
DECagent code. Probably in V1.2. Doesn't seem to work in V1.1
which I'm running.
Not much difference in buying 3 DECagent 90's or 3 DECbridge 90's.
Personally I like using a bridge in the hub and have a DECagent
somewhere else. Most of my customers do that but not all. Some
still wamt the cheapest way to connect a hub to a transceiver and
the only way to do that is with a DECrepeater 90FA.
I just quickly tried adding a DS90TL as a separate community but
the console port only allows a DB90, DB90FL, DS90L and DS90L+ as
a community. I've however added a DS90TL in a slot in the hub and
that seems stable. Although it is hilighted on the console as HUBWATCH
is set for no polling of the 90TL. Not sure at this point.
dave
|
| 221.6 | More info about the 90TL please | QUIVER::GAUDET | | Wed May 12 1993 14:41 | 11 |
| Unfortunately, hub mastership by the DECagent 90 will not be in V1.1.
We (the developers) were overruled by a higher authority.
Regarding the DS90TL, is there any reason why you'd want to add one as
a standalone community in the DECagent 90? The DECagent 90 doesn't
manage it, nor does it provide any useful information about it. If the
DS90TL were in the hub, then in cooperation with a DECbridge, the
DECagent will auto-discover it and obtain its IP address, community
string and MAC address via the backplane.
...Roger...
|