|
What is a "reasonably" sized domain? When do you think
a domain gets unweildy because of it's size?
> It depends on your environment. LAN, WAN, both and the mixes of
> protocols/technologies. Your present level is at 3200. This
> should be sufficient for most needs I would think. This could
> handle even two node4 areas plus room to breathe. Personally,
> a 3200 entity domain for me is unmanagable but may have its uses
> depending on management styles and what the tool is being used
> for. LAN domains may tend to get quite large if everything is
> lumped together (node4, node, IP, servers, etc..). Practically,
> this size wouldn't make sense unless the domain is created thru
> autoconfiguration. It's also tough to see 3200 objects on a map.
> It also depends on the amount of interaction needed to the entities.
> You could contain all the nodes on a LAN within a domain but how
> often is their real interaction to those objects (the less the
> interaction, the easier it is to maintain a larger domain)? They
> may be their for accounting purposes mainly and very occasional
> troubleshooting.
Also, how do you think people will structure the things
they have to manage? Will they create domains that contain
mostly one kind of entity or will they mix things?
> The trend may be to keep things seperated but I would think the
> future will bring more and more mix. That's what integration is
> all about and where this tool is leading us in a management space.
> But there are practical limitations of mixing as well so I wouldn't
> expect everybody to be mixing all entities within domains.
Will they create deeply nested domains or will they keep
things flat?
> The more complex the management, the deeper the nesting. If a
> customer tends to mix everything up they probably aren't managing
> extreme amounts of entities if they can afford to leave the domain
> flat. There will always be break points by which the user can segment
> domains (by area, site, subnet, class, even LAN segment if necessary)
> to keep their environment usable. The future problem I potentially
> see is autoconfiguration. With a large network, you could break a
> 3200 entity domain easily (machines don't have common sense).
brad...
|
| > What is a "reasonably" sized domain? When do you think
> a domain gets unweildy because of it's size?
If the current limit is 3200 as mentioned in the previous note, I think
that is big enough. It all depends what kind of structure you are
trying to represent eg. geographic, logical, organizational which all
require a different degree of detail. For a network manager I guess
that he would like to have for example: top-domain-->domain per site-->
domain per lan and maybe one per segment.
> Also, how do you think people will structure the things
> they have to manage? Will they create domains that contain
> mostly one kind of entity or will they mix things?
I think that people are tended towards grouping things geographically.
for example : one domain per (extended) lan. This means that this
domain would contain different types of equipment.
> Will they create deeply nested domains or will they keep
> things flat?
My experience is that if you use more than 3 (max 4) levels,
navigating becomes quite tedious. So I guess this tends to be a 'flat'
structure.
Hope this helps
Timo
If you have good input from custermers et al., we'd like
to here it. If you have a SWAG we'd like to here it too.
|