On 2006-Jan-09, at 05:00 , Jesús Couto wrote:
>
> - There is some monitoring in place, via scripts. In fact, one of the
> pains is the monitoring. 600 messages just today in the morning. There
> is a project to move to OpenView, but who knows when.
Even if there's a plan to move to OpenView, you might do well to
replace/clean up the current monitoring. Which you do depends on
whether the 600 alarms you've got this morning are the result of bad
monitoring software, bad configuration of the monitoring, or (god
forbid) real honest-to-goodness errors on your systems.
First, setting up something else (like nagios, or big brother) is
guaranteed to be faster than setting up OpenView, so you'll have
something working in the interim, while you wait for the PTB to
decide on a timeline for OpenView.
Second, one you have something else up and running cleanly, you (and
they) may come to the realization that you don't actually need OV.
There are cases where networks actually *need* OV, but in my
experience that's rare. I find it tends to be selected more for
political/marketing reasons, and it brings to your network its own
complexity which can be a problem if you're not a large network to
require it (and therefore large enough to support it).
Good luck,
Matt Pounsett
This is a digitally signed message part