| I can answer some of your questions...
> NT; Their concern is in the inability of their staff to conveniently
> manage multiple sites form multiple locations, including from home.
No problem as long as they have IP access (through dial-in PPP, etc) which
allows SNMP to pass through.
> Will these products be migrated to VMS under the affinity program?
No. HUBwatch V4.1 is the *last* *ever* clearVISN product for OpenVMS.
Tom Hood
Not the answerman, but I know Dotsie who is.
|
| Oh no, Mitch - you've discovered this notesfile. (You should have asked
me that on the phone the udder day.....or I thought I'd mentioned this
but I may be going senile....)
The direction that ALL the mainstream management stuff is going is
Windows/NT.
As long as you have IP connectivity via whatever vehicle - you can
manage the network.
In the Digital space, there are things like the DECserver 90M and
DECserver 900TM which the customer can use as "Network Access Servers".
We do NOT call them 'terminal servers' any more because they do SLIP,
PPP, Appletalk, Kerberos, Novell, etc. That is a TAD more than just
RS232/terminal stuff - they really DO allow you to access the network
remotely!
We do NOT do the Microsoft proprietary Windows-for-workgroup RAS
(remote *mumble* services) yet....dunno about Windows/NT RAS and the
future....
We ARE adding additional stuff like other security options for the
DECservers in the near future.
So - encourage them to re-use the network access servers that they have
as modem-pools and IP servers. Point out that the OTHER things like
Shiva etc., for remote access often REQUIRE proprietary client-ends -
where we are open and only require IP.
In terms of Hubwatch - I believe that there will be (tho it's not in
stone):
- A migration program to ENCOURAGE other customers to migrate to NT
(Bill Gates will be pleased)
- Segmenetation of Hubwatch into a real low-end stack only version
and a high end manager type version
- Additional products to manage virtual LANs
- Things to do good things to routers
"Hubwatch" will basically acquire some cousins which will do mid-level
management - not as comprehensive as an 'enterprise' manager, but more
full functioned and robust.
Also there will be enhancements in the near future to provide more
monitoring (RMON) support in the switches etc.
So....yes, there are LOTS of good things to talk about in the remote
management area as well as where it's all going. Catch me the next
time (in 2000) when we're both in the office.
Regards,
j
|
|
Hmmmmm....
Thanks for the info, all. However, I'm afraid I wasn't quite explicit
enough in my explanation of what I meant by "remote" management. Hey -
if communicating was easy, we wouldn't have anything to do.
Here is the issue (I hope): The customer is considering the idea of
setting up an NT station to handle the network management. Really
likes the enVISN product fact sheets. Pretty impressive stuff.
The customer is VERY concerned with being able to alarm based on trap
events, and monitoring relative changes in various MIB values. As I
understand it, the new ClearVisn Alarm product will handle this. All
well and good.
How does the customer manage this one "management" station remotely?
He has about ten sites that have operational staff to monitor the
network status for the site. He needs to be able to have a network
monitor/management station for each site, set up such that he can
manage the "management" stations remotely. This is simplicity itself
in the VMS world (he's doing it today with MCC), but has no idea how to
handle this situation in the NT space.
Neither do I - other than suggesting he try a NT version of PC/Anywhere
(which I haven't suggested, and don't plan to). I can't imaging what
that would be like over a dialup connection. :-)
Jon - I'll call you.
Thanks!
Mitch
|