Community
- Command Central
- MVP Program
- Monthly Mission
- Blogs
- Groups
- Events
- Media Vault
Products
- Observability
- Network Management
- Application Management
- IT Security
- IT Service Management
- System Management
- Database Management
Content Exchange
- SolarWinds Platform
- Server & Application Monitor
- Database Performance Analyzer
- Server Configuration Monitor
- Network Performance Monitor
- Network Configuration Manager
- SQL Sentry
- Web Help Desk
Free Tools & Trials
Store

Does anyone use NPM for Juniper Devices...

We have SRX210/3400s Firewalls, EX4200/4500/8200 switches as well as the SSG350/550 Firewalls. I am trying to pull data such as the CPU/Memory/Temperature. I saw the UnDPs that are out there but they give cryptic charts/tables. The interfaces are numbered weird like "1.0" and the output is hard to interpret. Has anyone been able to get useful information from the UnDP pollers from any of these devices?? I am not "that" great with the UnDP so it is probably "user error" and I just need a little push in the right direction.

Thanks,

Kim

Find more posts tagged with

juniper

Accepted answers

All comments

MarieB

Hi Kim--

I found this post for monitoring temperature on the EX switch:

Also, for further education on UnDPs, check out that chapter in the Orion NPM Administrator Guide. See pacetti's post in this thread:

The chapter is really informative.

HTH,

FormerMember

I found out today that Juniper uses custom MIBS and Solarwinds/Orion does not support anything that is not outside of the standard. They can add custom MIBS, but I am told by their support that it would be very hard to get Solarwinds to do that.

My company has put in a completely new WAN/LAN using Juniper and now that we're ready to roll out the network, we find that Solarwinds does not support the Juniper MIBS.

Juniper is not a small company and I don't see how Solarwinds will grow it's market share without accomodating all vendors. Except for the few legacy Cisco devices still in operation, we have very litle reason to use Solarwinds now.

byrona

I found out today that Juniper uses custom MIBS and Solarwinds/Orion does not support anything that is not outside of the standard. They can add custom MIBS, but I am told by their support that it would be very hard to get Solarwinds to do that.
My company has put in a completely new WAN/LAN using Juniper and now that we're ready to roll out the network, we find that Solarwinds does not support the Juniper MIBS.
Juniper is not a small company and I don't see how Solarwinds will grow it's market share without accomodating all vendors. Except for the few legacy Cisco devices still in operation, we have very litle reason to use Solarwinds now.

I think the information you have regarding SolarWinds may be incorrect, or at least partially incorrect.

If it can be monitored with SNMP, then you can monitor it with SolarWinds. No, SolarWinds doesn't necessarily give you CPU, Memory, etc for every node automatically; however, it does provide you the framework to get this information and display it. Once you have configured SolarWinds to collect the critical information for any device, then it's just a matter of applying those pollers to those devices going forward.

You won't find any NMS that supports every device out of the box, the important thing is having the framework and flexibility to get that information and display it which SolarWinds does.

IMO any NMS worth having will require customization and SolarWinds does this.

ChrystalT

You should be able to use the Universal Device Poller resource to get the information that you are looking for. As you create and assign your pollers, you have the ability for them to be shown on the web interface essentially giving you the same data that comes out of the box for other nodes. As byrona mentioned, all devices do not use the standard MIBs that Orion uses out of the box to poll for this data, but the availabilty to poll it is there. Hope this helps.

FormerMember

I appreciate the information provided. Unfortunately, any MIB not in the natural polling engine, will get read by the universal device poller, but that's it. Data is read and displayed. One can not get manipulated data like max/average CPU usage for the day, max/average memory usage for the day, peak/average utilization for the day, etc. Top management wants the 'big picture' reports. These can not be provided through the universal device poller. I nee3d about ten MIBS put into the natural polling engine, but as I mentioned earlier, I was told by the Solarwinds support engineer that it's not going to happen.

fcaron

Kim,

The numbering you are refering to ("1.0") is probably due to sub-interfaces configured on physical interfaces (hence teh 2-level numbering) being used in your SSG (VLAN, tunnels). Can you confirm that this is what you are looking for?

FYI there is another thread about sub-interfaces here:

Active requirement, we are looking at it.

I am also recording MJM's interest for CPU and Memory. Can you confirm what device you are running? Routers or firewalls? (16938)

Byrona, tks for your contribution.

adeimel

I've posted a couple of NPM juniper pollers on the content exchange that youcan probably use as templates. I've had no issues getting details out of 4200/8200s as well as the SRXs.

I'll agree setting up UnDP is a bit confusing the first couple of times through, but it is possible to get the info you want.

sja

I think its more "matter of will" den Mibs2 support

Its sure work for the EX3200 in the solarwind demo

sshuang68

We're currently using UNDP to monitor the CPU/Memory/Temp on the Juniper devices. It would be nice to get native support for Juniper devices to avoid the manual configuration to get that data. Thanks.

MarieB

sshuany and other Juniper posters--

Rest assured, the PM is aware of your request for native Juniper support. It will be added asap.

MarieB

sshuany and other Juniper posters--

Rest assured, the PM is aware of your request for native Juniper support. It will be added asap.

fcaron

Adding more votes for native support of Juniper routers (CPU, Memory) - (32065)

In the meantime, have you seen this:

skullone

Another vote. We just picked up SWI with some big unlimited licenses, and getting detailed monitoring into our environment, and noticing severe lack of native Juniper device monitoring.
Something we didn't explore during eval, but quite annoying now, since our previous network device monitoring (Cacti) had pretty good support, and was free.

sja

I need to know what thats mean?

"PM is aware of your request for native Juniper support. It will be added asap"

:-)

A.Is that mean YES it will be added to NPM 10.X (we allocate development resources to the job)

B.We agnolege the need for support.(we didn't allocate development resources to the job)

/SJA

smartd

Regarding Juniper Interfaces.
Juniper has physical interfaces, and logical interfaces. When you define an interface, you assign it to a unit, which is the number after the decimal, i.e. ge-0/0/0.0 For layer 2 you assign unit 0 to the family ethernet-switching, and with IP to Inet. So every interface on a Juniper has a "sub-interface" which is Cisco-ease. However, errors are part of the physical interface, so you need monitor the physical interface. IP addresses, LLDP, and Netflow(SFLOW) are tied to the logical interface. Juniper also assigns Unit number for VLANS much like CIsco sub-interfaces.

I guess the key here is that SW should not consider the Unit 0 logical interface to be a sub-interface, but part of the physical interface.

ctopaloglu

Regarding Juniper Interfaces. Juniper has physical interfaces, and logical interfaces. When you define an interface, you assign it to a unit, which is the number after the decimal, i.e. ge-0/0/0.0 For layer 2 you assign unit 0 to the family ethernet-switching, and with IP to Inet. So every interface on a Juniper has a "sub-interface" which is Cisco-ease. However, errors are part of the physical interface, so you need monitor the physical interface. IP addresses, LLDP, and Netflow(SFLOW) are tied to the logical interface. Juniper also assigns Unit number for VLANS much like CIsco sub-interfaces. I guess the key here is that SW should not consider the Unit 0 logical interface to be a sub-interface, but part of the physical interface.

I aggree.

fcaron

I agree with this, on Juniper routers (JunOS), which is different than on Juniper ScreenOs (SSg's)

On routers, we have a requirement open (63744), to handle the fact that the physical interface has some attributes / metrics and the attached sub-interface (usually 1:1 mapping) has other attributes and metrics. Managing them as 2 different objects is artificial and the requirement is to collapse (combine) these 2 objects into a single one, that will support all attributes/metrics from the originally separated objects.

My read of your description above, is that it confirms my view above.

I will add your voice to this requirement.

This requirement is not in the 10.2 currently in RC.

smartd

Right JunOS:
SRX, Routers, EX switches.

Yes, subinterfaces 1:1 unless routing vlans on one interface (router on a stick) which is a corner case.

jokerfest

haha BUMP