pserwe

Yeah, it would be so much easier if there was simply a "rule number field" that could be edited and have it be smart enough to insert it above whatever rule number it was replacing, shifting the whole list down. Even better would be able to manually set the rule number to a random number between 1 and say 65536, so that I…

This isn't true for any basic polling based alerting, or alerting on UnDP's. Syslog and Traps notably, have not been integrated yet, but the old Advanced Alert Manager is effectively gone at least as of the 11.5.2 release I'm running today. Thanks, Peter

This is a duplicate of idea 1309 and should be merged. Peter

As a side note, you should be able to find the "building our own MIBS" feature request thread, guess there wasn't one

For a more detailed reply, this folds very nicely in with Mike Driskell's idea 1139. Peter

Wow. This is so critical. Imagine SNMP was invented back in 1988. How many entire architectures have existed and died since it was first invented. The biggest problem with SW keeping all of this flowing through them is that people simply don't have the time to keep posting over and over again, and waiting over and over…

I totally agree, there need to be multiple access rights objects so that the conglomerate is all of the rights of all assigned access group objects. The way it is now, it's kind of like that on a per user basis, and the point is not to have to click 75 times to create a user with the proper restrictions.

You are missing out on a ton of great features using that ancient NPM 10.5 - the product had a number of major enhancements in the last 1.02 of release bumps. Even 11 is a big step back from what 11.5.2 does now.. *especially* fond of hands-free world map device placement based on SNMP Location string (1/2/2c/3). Peter

mavturner​ Literally every permission that is possible to set, and the ability to set up groups / templates for user rights like "NOC" or "VoiceEngineer" or "NetworkEngineer" that would define both the complete list of devices (defined by user-defined custom properties) as well as what types of rights are permissible for…

One thing I believe it might be relevant to add.. Definitely the Trap Service (and I *think* the Syslog service?) are win32 apps.. These should get updated to win64 for those of us running Server 2008 R2 which is currently I believe the recommended version. On a side note, the Trap Service doesn't seem to stop properly…

I have a different way I handle it. For the 60-100 custom properties I may want to set on a node or interface, I do the inserts on the Nodes or Interfaces tables directly once I have the node provisioned. I find my targets by doing a SQL query on one of them that would not be filled ever manually, and then automatically…

Okay, first off.. I am more fond of Rob's attempt to help us push the product's direction in the ways we want to see it go than several other PM's I've run across in past history. I think he gets more push back internally than we ever hear about and that he's often fighting uphill as well. That being said, the below are…

Nice to know there's 19 folks at least interested in seeing some action on this. Anyone have any comments to attempt to help push this along? Additions?

One ring to bind them. +65535! Peter

Any updates Mike? SW? Peter

I am pretty convinced that overhauling syslog and traps is an underlying step to this, but I could see how they could just unify the UI and ignore the underlying components. That would make things less optimal though, we want Syslog and Traps to share the same interface *and* potentially a lot of the same underlying…

Some others I'd like to see.. along with generally better support for Juniper, but specifically: Juniper MX series, SRX. Cisco IOS (65xx/76xx) with catalyst vlan in ios mode Cisco ASR 1k/9k Cisco Nexus/CRS Cisco ASA 55xx/-X Cisco IAD24xx Adtran TA / Netvanta Peter

It's actually relatively easy to determine, with the caveat that the information only as good as $POLLING_CYCLE allows it to be. Node or interface up/down detection is much more reliable with traps, but last time I tried, trap based interface status changing was a pipe dream at the scale I'm at, and haven't had the brass…

Now that's a requirement I haven't heard before! Even better reason for more traction. Peter

This is one of the best feature requests I've seen, and I would think would be pretty easy to get nailed down. Supersized +1.

I don't care what sort of verbal commitments are made, I care about progress on these ancient core functionality issues that keep getting stuffed for crap that fills checkboxes so people who haven't even used the application or paid for it, get all excited about how good it looks on paper. I care about the fact that the…

This sort of very detailed and precise rights restriction is critical for us all, but Rob isn't lying when he says there's a ton of other low hanging fruit right now. Syslog, Traps, and a unified alerting engine are critical things as well. But let's face it Rob, you know as we all do how long this has been a flaky portion…

bump!

One other thing.. I'm not sure if it's still true, because I have never dared use it again, but the last time I tried to do trap or syslog suppression, the behavior exhibited was that any suppression suppresses *ALL* alerts. I don't recall if this was with just regular/advanced alerts, or traps or syslog or all of the…

Anyone else notice the idea links broken?

How about CSV export and import of rule definitions? That would be ideal for managing large amounts of rules, or anything over 10 different rules. Peter

NPM sucks as a trap server though. How about forwarding alerts or notable events to Orion as a possible action for a single trap, or XX number of traps so that alerts could be generated for single traps or XX traps in the last NN minutes/hours/days? Peter

Here's the problem with the traditional process: 1) MIB DB size limitation of 512MB. This means that SW periodically has to pick what MIBs to remove in order to make space for more. Many implementations of various pieces of equipment are incomplete or made incomplete by this process. The first time this happened was…

It's kind of ridiculous at this point, how there are no comments from SW, even though this is the 2nd top most voted Feature Request. I mean seriously, if this isn't the #1 most critical issue at this point, 5 YEARS into using the software, and it hasn't hardly changed (vbscript variables don't really count), it's…

Oh, and all comments on this thread are moderated.. nice.