nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

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

Cirrus 3.5 User/Device Tracker?

skaczkowski

Has anyone had the chance to test it yet?

We haven't installed the new version quite yet and I wanted to know if it's gotten any better since 3.0..

Thanks!

-Steve

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

FormerMember

Where is that feature?

jkoebel

Well I just tried it and I think its worse than before. Why is the user tracker so BAD in Cirrus? I guess if I was using Cirrus in a network with only one or two switches it would work pretty good. But when you have a network that spans several regions with hundreds of switches the User/IP Address finder doesn't work well at all. When I do a search for my own IP Address I get hundreds of responses. I don't care if a switch in another state that I have never even seen much less plugged into has my mac in its arp table. And I don't care if its got a rank of 6. First and foremost, show me what device and what port my device is patched into. If you can't do that then give me the top 10 ranked in some sort of order. This was a key feature for us and needs to be fixed. Without this feature working there won't be much repeat business.

jk

skaczkowski

Exactly..

Haley, what's going on?

I remember having a lengthy conversation with yourself and Denny about what features we're looking for in Cirrus and Orion. One of the features was a much *MUCH* improved User Tracker, this was even at the top of our list!

Now that we have 3.5 installed we've found that the User Tracker hasn't been improved at all, how come? Seems that a lot of users on here were also looking for a better UT as well.

Here's why I think this feature is useless. I just did a find on a server in our Data Center which is actually on the same subnet as the Cirrus server. So worst case it should report back with a couple of switches and the server hanging off one of the ports, right? Wrong, it lists out, get this.. 2500 entries!

2500?

Why the heck is it listing out 2500 POSSIBLE locations for this machine? It should be about 3, just tell me where it's connected, this whole rating thing makes ZERO sense and is totally useless.

So, how come this was missed? Seems to me this would be a core feature of a system that's competing directly with Ciscoworks which has a great UT..

Is this something we can look forward to with 3.5.1 or is this just pie in the sky?

Inquiring minds want to know..

-Steve

Haley

We appreciate your comments and feedback regarding the Cirrus Configuration Manager. We are currently evaluating the Find MAC/Find IP functionality. I do not have a specific date for improving the mapping capability; however, this is a top priority and is slated for an upcoming release.

skaczkowski

Perfect!

That's what I wanted to hear..

Thanks Haley!

-Steve

jkoebel

Any Status on this yet?

John Koebel

mattand666

Yeah - status please!

Haley

Currently, we are leveraging SNMP to help identify how devices on the network are connected. Depending on how the network is configured, devices may be included in several devices' arp tables. This is the several devices may be listed in the connectivity list.

We are currently evaluating other methods for determining connectivity. Are there any tools out there that you feel are very useful for identifying port connectivity?

jkoebel

Are there any tools out there that you feel are very useful for identifying port connectivity?

Yes Haley, we have Cisco Works and it does a great job. The problem is we are phasing it out. With Cisco Works we don't have to wade through rankings which don't are not presented in an order which is useful. I don't want to pretend to know how to fix it but I will throw some crazy ideas out there for you.

Since you are using a ranking system and you are showing us pretty much any switch thats got the layer 2 address (of the host we are trying to find) in its mac table, why not give us the option to filter the results down. For example, give us the option to filter out ports that are configured as trunks. With this type of filter in place that should narrow the results down considerably. In fact with several of the searches I have done that would give me exactly what i am looking for. Once you have the list narrowed why not have cirrus go to the remaining device(s) in the list and parse the mac tables as a final confirmation.

Thanks

John Koebel

mattand666

Agreed - after filtering out non 'access' ports (trunks), a well designed switched network should only have one port left on the list - the port where the MAC address actually resides. Don't know how CiscoWorks did it, but it managed to filter out trunks. Alternatively, you could discount any port with more than one MAC address associated to it (as opposed to checking trunk vs. access status). Again, in a switched environment MOST ports out there are access ports, and only one should have a given MAC address associated. Doesn't need to be perfect.

jkoebel

Any update on this yet Haley?

Haley

This is a request development is still looking into for the next major release.