[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference azur::mcc

Title:DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT.
Notice:Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187
Moderator:TAEC::BEROUD
Created:Mon Aug 21 1989
Last Modified:Wed Jun 04 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:6497
Total number of notes:27359

579.0. "Positioning Info on AT&T,IBM,HP,Nynex" by SUBWAY::LOUIE (JANE) Tue Dec 25 1990 17:46

    
    Are there any positioning information on the following competitors?
    
    AT&T Accumaster
    IBM NetView
    HP OpenView
    Nynex Allink
    Net/Master
    
    Thanks,
    	   Jane
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
579.1Integrated management positioningPRUNES::GASSMANWed Dec 26 1990 12:4430
    MCC is positioned as an integration management system.  It's different
    than other systems in that it allows non-standard protocol devices to
    be integrated in thru the AM process.  The MCC concept of a repository
    also sets it apart from other management systems.  AT&T's accumaster
    requires that the 'other manager' speak NMP, an AT&T varient of CMIP.
    IBM's NETview has limited ability to add new verbs and attributes to
    their repository, meaning that 'non-sna' things must be made to look
    like 'sna' things.  NETview also has limited bi-directional
    communication abilities.  SCI's NETmaster is a great way to manage SNA
    networks, and Digital has a joint marketing and development agreement
    with that company.  NETmaster will be useful in the future to integrate
    SNA information into the EMA environment (and vice-versa).
    
    HP Openview is a standards based management system which is very object
    oriented, uses a CMIS API, and for the most part, only supports SNMP
    devices at this point.  They are very strong competition to Digital,
    both with MCC and with MSU.  
    
    One vendor you didn't mention is SUN's NETmanager.  It's enjoyed a
    large following of OEM's over the past three years, and is firmly
    entrenched as a management system.  It does any one protocol well, but
    doesn't seem to be able to handle 'many' foreign protocols at once.
    Their technique for AM type function is to place processes on remote
    machines, and use RPC's to communicate to them.
    
    That's pretty much it for the 'integrated' management system.  If you
    are interested in SNMP management systems, there are about 30 to choose
    from.  I have a list with a comment about many if you are interested.
    
    bill