Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
On Thursday, 10/22/2009 at 10:41 EDT, Stephen Frazier ste...@doc.state.ok.us wrote: So SSI (zVM0 is HA (VMware) and Live Guest Relocation (zVM) is vmotion (VMware). I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. The architecture is SSI or HA and LGR or vmotion is what you can do with the architecture. As I said, LGR is *one* of the services intended to be provided by a z/VM SSI cluster. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Delete cms file record using PIPE
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 6:39 AM, Gonen Shoham gone...@sapiens.com wrote: I am not a PIPE expert The criteria is actually delete lines where word(1) = 'XX' and word(3) = 'YY' and substring(25,1) = 'a' etc We probably should have such discussions on CMSPIP-L instead... The etc makes cheating very hard ;-) The generic solution really is multi-stream pipelines. The idea there is that your pipeline spits the records in two groups based on the first selection, and subsequent stages split the matched records further in two groups, etc. But you need to collect the unmatched records in each phase and pass them all back to the main path (since you did not want to delete them). So you get a network of pipelines that connect at the beginning and end of the process. Have a look at Melinda's first 2 papers on the CMS Pipelines Homepage. input file a | a1: pick w1 ^== ,XX, | y: faninany | output file a \ a1: | a2: pick w3 ^== ,YY, | y: \ a2: | a3: pick 25.1 ^== ,a, | y: I have reversed the condition (select the records that do NOT match) because it keeps the pipeline a bit more straight. And because you only had *and* in your selection, the pattern is rather obvious. Sir Rob the Plumber PS Very lazy plumbers would (when it is just a one-time effort) simply repeat the same process a few times. Run the pipeline once to skip the XX records, another time to skip the YY, etc. And accept that you read and write the file a few times.
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
Personally I wish people would quit trying to compare z/VM with vmWARE. There is really no comparison. I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Alan Altmark Sent: Fri 10/23/2009 1:10 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 On Thursday, 10/22/2009 at 10:41 EDT, Stephen Frazier ste...@doc.state.ok.us wrote: So SSI (zVM0 is HA (VMware) and Live Guest Relocation (zVM) is vmotion (VMware). I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. The architecture is SSI or HA and LGR or vmotion is what you can do with the architecture. As I said, LGR is *one* of the services intended to be provided by a z/VM SSI cluster. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. What's wrong with referring to VMware (proper case sensitivity) as VM? Oh wait... that's right, VM _really_ means: Virtual Memory ooops, Voice Mail... hmmm, Java Virtual Machines e, Vulnerability Management uhhh, Value Multiplicity... ummm, the IBM z/VM operating system, or Very Mixed-up? It only confuses those in the executive suite. OK, let's say that everyone uses the right acronym, and when there are multiple meanings, always spells out the proper meaning before referring to the acronym subsequently in that communication. The those occupying the executive suites are still going to be confused. IT is not their strong point, it's ours. So we have to be especially careful to translate into their obfuscated executive language, or risk losing their attention, understanding, and what we're requesting no matter how strong the business case (communicating a strong business case is the part where WE are weakest). Mike Walter Hewitt Associates The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, certainly not my employer's. Huegel, Thomas thue...@kable.com Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 10/23/2009 08:50 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 Personally I wish people would quit trying to compare z/VM with vmWARE. There is really no comparison. I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Alan Altmark Sent: Fri 10/23/2009 1:10 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 On Thursday, 10/22/2009 at 10:41 EDT, Stephen Frazier ste...@doc.state.ok.us wrote: So SSI (zVM0 is HA (VMware) and Live Guest Relocation (zVM) is vmotion (VMware). I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. The architecture is SSI or HA and LGR or vmotion is what you can do with the architecture. As I said, LGR is *one* of the services intended to be provided by a z/VM SSI cluster. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
I just say zVM (or zed-VM) whenever referring to 'our' VM -- that seems to keep everyone clear. And I don't refer to VMWare at all - which keeps it even clearer ;-) Scott On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com wrote: I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. What's wrong with referring to VMware (proper case sensitivity) as VM? Oh wait... that's right, VM _really_ means: Virtual Memory ooops, Voice Mail... hmmm, Java Virtual Machines e, Vulnerability Management uhhh, Value Multiplicity... ummm, the IBM z/VM operating system, or Very Mixed-up? It only confuses those in the executive suite. OK, let's say that everyone uses the right acronym, and when there are multiple meanings, always spells out the proper meaning before referring to the acronym subsequently in that communication. The those occupying the executive suites are still going to be confused. IT is not their strong point, it's ours. So we have to be especially careful to translate into their obfuscated executive language, or risk losing their attention, understanding, and what we're requesting no matter how strong the business case (communicating a strong business case is the part where WE are weakest). Mike Walter Hewitt Associates The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, certainly not my employer's. Huegel, Thomas thue...@kable.com Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 10/23/2009 08:50 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 Personally I wish people would quit trying to compare z/VM with vmWARE. There is really no comparison. I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Alan Altmark Sent: Fri 10/23/2009 1:10 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 On Thursday, 10/22/2009 at 10:41 EDT, Stephen Frazier ste...@doc.state.ok.us wrote: So SSI (zVM0 is HA (VMware) and Live Guest Relocation (zVM) is vmotion (VMware). I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. The architecture is SSI or HA and LGR or vmotion is what you can do with the architecture. As I said, LGR is *one* of the services intended to be provided by a z/VM SSI cluster. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: Delete cms file record using PIPE
Look at the sample in one of my previous posts. Change the w2 to w3 and you have it. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Gonen Shoham Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:40 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Delete cms file record using PIPE I am not a PIPE expert The criteria is actually delete lines where word(1) = 'XX' and word(3) = 'YY' and substring(25,1) = 'a' etc Any sample around ? Thanks -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Doug Breneman Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 11:25 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Delete cms file record using PIPE Gonen, Please consider using the NLOCATE or the PICK stages. Doug Breneman Z/VM Development IBM Endicott Inactive hide details for Gonen Shoham ---10/22/2009 05:23:49 PM---I have a CMS file in which I need to delete lines that meet Gonen Shoham ---10/22/2009 05:23:49 PM---I have a CMS file in which I need to delete lines that meet specific criteria. From: Gonen Shoham gone...@sapiens.com To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Date: 10/22/2009 05:23 PM Subject: Delete cms file record using PIPE Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU I have a CMS file in which I need to delete lines that meet specific criteria. For example - Delete all line where (word,1) = 'XX' and (word,2) = 'YY' Can someone suggest a way to perform this task using PIPES ? Thanks
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
When you must support both you need to always state which you are referring to (zVM) or (VMware). Scott Rohling wrote: I just say zVM (or zed-VM) whenever referring to 'our' VM -- that seems to keep everyone clear. And I don't refer to VMWare at all - which keeps it even clearer ;-) Scott -- Stephen Frazier Information Technology Unit Oklahoma Department of Corrections 3400 Martin Luther King Oklahoma City, Ok, 73111-4298 Tel.: (405) 425-2549 Fax: (405) 425-2554 Pager: (405) 690-1828 email: stevef%doc.state.ok.us
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
What a novel suggestion, speak to the level of the intended audience. Strunk and White could not convince folks to do it. I wish you good luck in your efforts. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Mike Walter Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 7:37 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. What's wrong with referring to VMware (proper case sensitivity) as VM? Oh wait... that's right, VM _really_ means: Virtual Memory ooops, Voice Mail... hmmm, Java Virtual Machines e, Vulnerability Management uhhh, Value Multiplicity... ummm, the IBM z/VM operating system, or Very Mixed-up? It only confuses those in the executive suite. OK, let's say that everyone uses the right acronym, and when there are multiple meanings, always spells out the proper meaning before referring to the acronym subsequently in that communication. The those occupying the executive suites are still going to be confused. IT is not their strong point, it's ours. So we have to be especially careful to translate into their obfuscated executive language, or risk losing their attention, understanding, and what we're requesting no matter how strong the business case (communicating a strong business case is the part where WE are weakest). Mike Walter Hewitt Associates The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, certainly not my employer's. Huegel, Thomas thue...@kable.com Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 10/23/2009 08:50 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 Personally I wish people would quit trying to compare z/VM with vmWARE. There is really no comparison. I also wish people would quit referring to vmWARE VM... It only confuses those in the executive suite. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Alan Altmark Sent: Fri 10/23/2009 1:10 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 On Thursday, 10/22/2009 at 10:41 EDT, Stephen Frazier ste...@doc.state.ok.us wrote: So SSI (zVM0 is HA (VMware) and Live Guest Relocation (zVM) is vmotion (VMware). I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. The architecture is SSI or HA and LGR or vmotion is what you can do with the architecture. As I said, LGR is *one* of the services intended to be provided by a z/VM SSI cluster. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: Delete cms file record using PIPE
Another generic solution that avoids multi-stream pipes is: PIPE input file a | REXX filter | output file a and code the REXX filter stage to do whatever complicated filtering process you want to do. Brian Nielsen On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:15:25 +0200, Rob van der Heij rvdh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 6:39 AM, Gonen Shoham gone...@sapiens.com wrot e: I am not a PIPE expert The criteria is actually delete lines where word(1) = 'XX' and word( 3) = 'YY' and substring(25,1) = 'a' etc We probably should have such discussions on CMSPIP-L instead... The etc makes cheating very hard ;-) The generic solution really is multi-stream pipelines. The idea there is that your pipeline spits the records in two groups based on the first selection, and subsequent stages split the matched records further in two groups, etc. But you need to collect the unmatched records in each phase and pass them all back to the main path (since you did not want to delete them). So you get a network of pipelines that connect at the beginning and end of the process. Have a look at Melinda's first 2 papers on the CMS Pipelines Homepage. input file a | a1: pick w1 ^== ,XX, | y: faninany | output file a \ a1: | a2: pick w3 ^== ,YY, | y: \ a2: | a3: pick 25.1 ^== ,a, | y: I have reversed the condition (select the records that do NOT match) because it keeps the pipeline a bit more straight. And because you only had *and* in your selection, the pattern is rather obvious. Sir Rob the Plumber PS Very lazy plumbers would (when it is just a one-time effort) simply repeat the same process a few times. Run the pipeline once to skip the XX records, another time to skip the YY, etc. And accept that you read and write the file a few times. = ===
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. Reading the whole sentence, (zVM0 was meant to be (zVM). He just didn't hold the shift key down for the right paren. Yes, I know it should be z/VM. Dennis My computer beat me at chess, but it was no match for me in kickboxing. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 23:10 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: [IBMVM] z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23 On Thursday, 10/22/2009 at 10:41 EDT, Stephen Frazier ste...@doc.state.ok.us wrote: So SSI (zVM0 is HA (VMware) and Live Guest Relocation (zVM) is vmotion (VMware). I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. The architecture is SSI or HA and LGR or vmotion is what you can do with the architecture. As I said, LGR is *one* of the services intended to be provided by a z/VM SSI cluster. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
On Friday, 10/23/2009 at 12:34 EDT, O'Brien, Dennis L dennis.l.o'br...@bankofamerica.com wrote: I don't know what zVM0 is, so I can't answer your question. Reading the whole sentence, (zVM0 was meant to be (zVM). He just didn't hold the shift key down for the right paren. Yes, I know it should be z/VM. Thanks - I didn't notice the unmatched parens even though I red the whole sentence. KVM has a widget called Dom0, so I was afraid that I was unwittingly going to wander down a dark and dangerous path. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
That sentence wasn't red, it was black. :-)(This must be Friday.) Regards, Richard Schuh Thanks - I didn't notice the unmatched parens even though I red the whole sentence.
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
On Friday 23 October 2009, Schuh, Richard wrote: That sentence wasn't red, it was black. :-)(This must be Friday.) ...and not a moment too soon! :-) Cheers, Bob -- Bob Woodside Woodsway Consulting, Inc. http://www.woodsway.com
Re: z/VM 6.1 G.A. targeted for this Friday, Oct 23
And while we're debating correct terminology, remember that it's z/VM. The slash is required: it's software. z/VM, z/OS, z/VSE, z/TPF, z/Architecture (yeah, that's considered software). z10, z9, z900, z800, etc. -- hardware.
Sending an SNMPTRAP alert from Velocity to NETCOOL/OMNIBUS console
Hi
I am trying to send an ALERT captured in Velocity ESAMON over to our
NETCOOL/OMNIBUS console. I have the Velocity piece set up and we can see
that the ALERT gets to the OMNIBUS console. See logs below. However
nothing is being done with it because the OMNIBUS guy tells me that
there needs to be a SNMP TRAP PROBE RULE defined. This is where it gets
a little foggy for me.
What should this rule look like on the OMNIBUS side to pick up my ALERT
and have an email sent out based on the alert?
I am also a little confused between a MIB and an OID in some of the
documentation I read they seem to be used interchangeable.
Anyway here is the SNMP TRAPDEST file that is defined in ESATCP:
* THIS FILE IS THE LIST OF SNMP TRAP DESTINATIONS
* FORMAT IS IP ADDRESS, COMMUNITY NAME, AND OPT OID
158.xx.xxx.xxx velocity 2B0601020102020102
Here is the log from the OMNIBUS console. I added 'X's to the IP address
for privacy sake.:
10/15/09 14:37:12: Debug: 1 trap in queue
10/15/09 14:37:12: Debug: V1 trap received
10/15/09 14:37:12: Information: Number of items in the trap queue is 0
10/15/09 14:37:14: Debug: 158.xx.xxx.226: gethostbyaddr: h_errno = 1
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: 158.xx.xxx.226: gethostbyaddr: h_errno = 1
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] ReqId: 0
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] enterprise:
.1.3.6.1.4.1.15601
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] generic-trap: 6
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] specific-trap: 0
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] UpTime: 845
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Uptime: 0:00:08.45
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] community: velocity
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] IPaddress: 158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] PeerIPaddress:
158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] ReceivedPort: 162
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] ReceivedTime:
1255610232
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Protocol: UDP
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] SNMP_Version: 1
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] OID1:
.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.2
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1: PAGE SPACE IS 34.43%
USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1_raw: PAGE SPACE IS
34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1_text: PAGE SPACE IS
34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1_hex: 50 41 47 45 20
53 50 41 43 45 20 49 53 20 20 33 34 2e 34 33 25 20 55 53 45 44 20
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] .1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.2:
PAGE SPACE IS 34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Node: 158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] PeerAddress:
158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] EventCount: 1355
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Processing alert {0
remaining}
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering... snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
FixMttrapdOids.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
FixMttrapdOids.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (snmptrap.rules) Event is an
enterprise-specific trap.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (snmptrap.rules) Enterprise ID not
found, checking ncotdc include files.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (snmptrap.rules) Enterprise ID not found
in any include file.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
CorrScore.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: A value for '' doesn't exist in lookup table
'snmptrapCorrScore' - using default
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
CorrScore.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
PreClass.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: A value for '' doesn't exist in lookup table
'snmptrapPreClass' - using default
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
PreClass.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
omnibus36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (omnibus36.include.compat.rules)
$OPTION_TypeFieldUsage NOT set to 3.6.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
omnibus36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
AdvCorr36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
AdvCorr36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving... snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Flushing events to object server
10/15/09 14:38:12: Debug: Sent Heartbeat Message
10/15/09 14:38:12: Information: Probewatch: Heartbeat Message
10/15/09 14:38:12: Debug: Entering...
CorrScore.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:38:12: Debug: A value for '' doesn't exist in lookup table
'snmptrapCorrScore' - using default
10/15/09 14:38:12: Debug: Leaving...
CorrScore.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:38:12: Debug: Entering...
PreClass.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:38:12: Debug: A value for '' doesn't exist in lookup table
Re: Sending an SNMPTRAP alert from Velocity to NETCOOL/OMNIBUS console
On Friday, 10/23/2009 at 04:36 EDT, Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) terry.mar...@cms.hhs.gov wrote: I am also a little confused between a MIB and an OID in some of the documentation I read they seem to be used interchangeable. A MIB (Management Information Base) is a collection of related OIDs (Object Identifiers). It can be a reference to a file that may contain: - The OID - The name of the OID - The data type of the OID - A human-readable description of the OID - Constraints (e.g. read-only) In that respect, the term MIB may also be a reference to the standard that defines the MIB. E.g. It's defined in the SWITCH MIB, RFC 1493. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Question on SSLSERV and multiple stacks
I finally got SSLESRV working on 5.4 with our CA. Yay! Now.. If I have more than one TCPIP stack on a system, say TCPIP and TCPIP2. I figure I'll need an SSLSERV and an SSLSERV2. But can they share /etc/gskadm/Database.kdb ? I can't see why not. And.. If I've done that, can they use the same cert? Or am I just dreaming? Marcy This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re: Sending an SNMPTRAP alert from Velocity to NETCOOL/OMNIBUS console
I'm interested too. I've not been able to get omnibus doc so would be
great if someone could provide doc on what is needed. We (Velocity
Software/ESALPS/zVPS) provide a lot of data and a lot of alerts.
Sending alerts somewhere that does not acknowledge doesn't do anyone any
good, and we are probably the best to provide snmp trap prob rules.
So, if somebody can help, it is time we (Velocity) provide assistance in
this area
Martin, Terry R. (CMS/CTR) (CTR) wrote:
Hi
I am trying to send an ALERT captured in Velocity ESAMON over to our
NETCOOL/OMNIBUS console. I have the Velocity piece set up and we can see
that the ALERT gets to the OMNIBUS console. See logs below. However
nothing is being done with it because the OMNIBUS guy tells me that
there needs to be a SNMP TRAP PROBE RULE defined. This is where it gets
a little foggy for me.
What should this rule look like on the OMNIBUS side to pick up my ALERT
and have an email sent out based on the alert?
I am also a little confused between a MIB and an OID in some of the
documentation I read they seem to be used interchangeable.
Anyway here is the SNMP TRAPDEST file that is defined in ESATCP:
* THIS FILE IS THE LIST OF SNMP TRAP DESTINATIONS
* FORMAT IS IP ADDRESS, COMMUNITY NAME, AND OPT OID
158.xx.xxx.xxx velocity 2B0601020102020102
Here is the log from the OMNIBUS console. I added ‘X’s to the IP address
for privacy sake.:
10/15/09 14:37:12: Debug: 1 trap in queue
10/15/09 14:37:12: Debug: V1 trap received
10/15/09 14:37:12: Information: Number of items in the trap queue is 0
10/15/09 14:37:14: Debug: 158.xx.xxx.226: gethostbyaddr: h_errno = 1
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: 158.xx.xxx.226: gethostbyaddr: h_errno = 1
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] ReqId: 0
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] enterprise: .1.3.6.1.4.1.15601
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] generic-trap: 6
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] specific-trap: 0
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] UpTime: 845
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Uptime: 0:00:08.45
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] community: velocity
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] IPaddress: 158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] PeerIPaddress:
158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] ReceivedPort: 162
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] ReceivedTime: 1255610232
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Protocol: UDP
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] SNMP_Version: 1
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] OID1: .1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.2
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1: PAGE SPACE IS 34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1_raw: PAGE SPACE IS
34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1_text: PAGE SPACE IS
34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] 1_hex: 50 41 47 45 20
53 50 41 43 45 20 49 53 20 20 33 34 2e 34 33 25 20 55 53 45 44 20
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] .1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.2:
PAGE SPACE IS 34.43% USED
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Node: 158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] PeerAddress:
158.xx.xxx.226
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] EventCount: 1355
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: [Event Processor] Processing alert {0 remaining}
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering... snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
FixMttrapdOids.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
FixMttrapdOids.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (snmptrap.rules) Event is an
enterprise-specific trap.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (snmptrap.rules) Enterprise ID not
found, checking ncotdc include files.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (snmptrap.rules) Enterprise ID not found
in any include file.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
CorrScore.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: A value for '' doesn't exist in lookup table
'snmptrapCorrScore' - using default
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
CorrScore.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
PreClass.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: A value for '' doesn't exist in lookup table
'snmptrapPreClass' - using default
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
PreClass.include.snmptrap.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
omnibus36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: (omnibus36.include.compat.rules)
$OPTION_TypeFieldUsage NOT set to 3.6.
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
omnibus36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Entering...
AdvCorr36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving...
AdvCorr36.include.compat.rules
10/15/09 14:37:21: Debug: Leaving... snmptrap.rules
10/15/09
OT (Software or not software)..
P S wrote: And while we're debating correct terminology, remember that it's z/VM. The slash is required: it's software. z/VM, z/OS, z/VSE, z/TPF, z/Architecture (yeah, that's considered software). z10, z9, z900, z800, etc. -- hardware. Almost but... Those products are still part of STG (Systems Technology Group), not SWG (Software Group) - so they are not really to be referred as software (i.e. not part of either Lotus/Websphere/Tivoli/IM/Rational brands). Ok.. it's friday (although - technically (again) for me, it's now saturday). (And man.. The day those 2 entities can mend their differences, I'll be partying like there is no tomorrow !) --Ivan
Re: OT (Software or not software)..
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Ivan Warren i...@vmfacility.fr wrote: Almost but... Those products are still part of STG (Systems Technology Group), not SWG (Software Group) - so they are not really to be referred as software (i.e. not part of either Lotus/Websphere/Tivoli/IM/Rational brands). Ok.. it's friday (although - technically (again) for me, it's now saturday). (And man.. The day those 2 entities can mend their differences, I'll be partying like there is no tomorrow !) Heh? STG has no software? That'll be a surprise to them...
Re: OT (Software or not software)..
P S wrote: Heh? STG has no software? That'll be a surprise to them... Of course they have software.. but it's not software.. It's usually Licensed Internal Code, or a System Product.. or some Systems Offering.. But it's irrelevant.. The problem is that both divisions have decent offerings.. but they are not cooperating (or at least they aren't in my locale and/or in my line of business).. I know.. Nothing (and I mean *nothing*) to do with z/VM whatsoever.. And yes, I overlapped my Friday allowance.. sorry guys.. --Ivan
