| > My problem now is that many of the NODE4 entities where also showing
> up as STATIONS.
Almost, but not quite accurate. In the DECmcc view of the world, a piece
of hardware which runs DECnet (your NODE4 entity) also has a separately
addressable global entity called a Station (the Ethernet adapter). These
are indeed two global entities to DECmcc, although they happen to reside in
a single cabinet.
> My question is how do I use DECmcc the right way to get a true map of
> our local network topologi?
When we figure it out, we'll let you know. :-)
When should I use STATION and when should I use NODE4.
Use STATION when you want to test the data link layer, or get information
about the Ethernet adapter (SYSID info, XID, etc.). Use NODE4 when you
want DECnet information.
> Do I have to put them in two different DOMAINs to be able to
> have both Ethernet loopback test possibilities and DECnet loopback
> possibilities?
I don't see any reason why that would be necessary. You might want to do
that for other reasons (e.g. - separation of levels of control), but I know
of no reason to require it.
> My MAP is becoming more and more messy, if I have to put up a node as
> two different entities.
It gets even worse than that if you add in SNMP, and some other global
entities that may coexist on the same piece of hardware. This is an issue
that we need to take a harder look at in future versions of the software.
Wayne
|
| Just to summarize Wayne's reply in .1
We agree it's not perfect yet.
The different "views" of entities represent the different means of
accessing different components of the entity - ie. different management
protocols. This, of course, is techno-babble, and you should not have
to put up with it. Unfortunately, it's not perfect yet...
We would like, over time, to integrate these "multiple views", so that
the (poor) user need not be aware of the implementation details. (After
all, who cares what management protocol is needed - I just want to
manage the d.mn thing.) There are a number of different ways we may
attempt this, including integration at the u/i (ie. at the PM level),
integration via an application (ie. at the FM level) and/or integration
at the entity level (and hence at the AM level). It's just not
perfect, yet...
Finally, I think there is a place for both "views", and you probably
want to choose one (or both) depending on your needs. If you are
primarily managing DECnet, you probably only need the NODE4 view; if you
are primarily managing an Ethernet, you probably only need the STATION
view; of course, those people who have both the DECnet software and the
Ethernet cable plant will probably need to worry about both. Note that
in the latter case you might accomplish this with different domains,
where one contains the DECnet nodes, and another the Stations, and use
a name philosophy to "tie" the station names to the corresponding
DECnet (ie. DECdns) names.
Hope this helps
Colin
|