Agree 100%. Clearly there are lots of Intermapper shops that are
constantly having to ignore interface discards, and it only makes
sense to have a global setting to reverse the default setting.
At 1:02 AM -0400 9/9/11, Kevin Wigle wrote:
Ok, after googling I found a very recent conversation on the same subject.
But it seems there is divided discussion on interface discards.
And I apologize to Evan - I didn't understand his suggestion about turning
off interface discards - I thought it was something configured on the device
similar to the "fault-finding" items on HP switches but I found it in IM and
I checked and indeed that switch doesn't "bubble" anymore.
What's interesting about all the threads I read and my own experience is
that many times I see interfaces reporting thousands of discards and no
matter how hard we look the hardware never agrees with what IM is saying -
aside from the fact that the hardware is sending SNMP info saying there is a
problem.
Whatever, Dartware typically blames the vendor for having a faulty
implementation of SNMP and if we are going to accept that then in that case
I think there is a reason enough to allow a global option for Set Behavior
to ignore interface disregards and not have to set it switch by switch.
Perhaps it shouldn't be set by default but at least give the admin the
choice. If he sets it he gets what he pays for.
Usually Dartware is pretty forward thinking and listens to the admins out
there and I think this time the majority of admins would like to have the
choice.
regards,
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Wigle [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 08 September, 2011 12:04 AM
To: 'InterMapper Discussion'
Subject: RE: [IM-Talk] SNMP Issues
nope - in all the years in this job I have only seen 2 switches configured
with that and they were local.
If I set that option will that stop IM from bubbling?
I still wonder, what does IM see that the hardware won't show me directly?
And since IM is polling the hardware to get info to display bubbles - what
is actually happening - and what is to be believed?
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Evan Gamblin
Sent: 07 September, 2011 11:21 PM
To: InterMapper Discussion
Subject: Re: [IM-Talk] SNMP Issues
Kevin:
Don't you usually set Ignore Interface Discards on switches?
Evan
On 2011-09-07, at 10:31 PM, Kevin Wigle wrote:
Dear Group,
I'm sure this has been touched on before but I need a refresher on
just how error indications on Intermapper relate to the actual
hardware being monitored.
Specifically we have a site that has two switches connected at 100 full.
Often the link between the switches will be "bubbling" away. Open
status and it will say something like 4000 discards a minute (and higher).
When I telnet to the switch and show stats on the interface the only
errors I see are 16 FCS errors. Not quite the 4000+ I expected to see.
So what do I trust?
How do I explain to other support personnel just what it means when IM
says that but the actual hardware says something else?
Especially bosses - they want to see that IM is actually worth having
but if we can't trust what we see - then what?
All opinions welcome.
regards,
Kevin
____________________________________________________________________
List archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/
To unsubscribe: send email to: [email protected]
____________________________________________________________________
List archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/
To unsubscribe: send email to: [email protected]
____________________________________________________________________
List archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/
To unsubscribe: send email to: [email protected]
____________________________________________________________________
List archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/
To unsubscribe: send email to: [email protected]
