This discussion has been locked. The information referenced herein may be inaccurate due to age, software updates, or external references.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a similar question you can start a new discussion in this forum.

Feature Request - Sign Up

Sign if you think the biggest feature improvement to Orion
should be service/port monitoring ala WUG.

I personally think it would be incredible then.

Strength in numbers, make yourself heard.
maybe v7.5

Thanks,

-Network Janitor
(time to empty the bit bucket)
  • here here or is it hear hear

    although a close second would be custom mibs (looks like they are working on this)

    I have been building custom resource items. If you are interested let me know and I will send you the files necessary to make everything work.

    73-TotalNodesVendor.Resource - totals the number of devices of each vendor type
    81-AllNodesGrouped.Resource - groups nodes by vendor and creates a show/hide vendor nodes list
    82-AllNodesbyVendor.Resource - same as above without the fancy show/hide feature
    83-AllNodesDetail.Resource - a report (table) that lists all the nodes in the database first by vendor then by type. Include IP address, type, vendor, CPU, and memory.
  • I don't agree I'm afraid. In order of importance IMO....

    1. Custom Mib reporting / alerting
    2. TRAP HANDLING (can't believe they missed that one!!)
    3. Device Grouping

    One could argue that NPM is a NETWORK performance monitor (up to L3 OSI). What you are requesting is monitoring APPLICATIONS (ports and services) - not the same thing.

    I agree however that it would be a 'nice to have' - and in fact, should not be too difficult to achieve
  • Thanks for the responses!

    I would think each mentioned above is already in some form of development:
    1. Custom Mib reporting / alerting
    2. TRAP HANDLING
    3. Device Grouping

    I haven't heard any mention of possibly extending Orion's capabilites
    to include layers 4-7, so I'm hoping to put it on their radar screen.

    All opinions are welcome.
  • I'd have to agree with Gonzajoh, application monitoring is a nice to have feature, but is not really what Orion is all about.

    My number one request is still having the port descriptions for Cisco Cat switches show up in Orion just as the router interface descriptions do.

    Editing each port with a server's name is very time consuming on a fully loaded 6513, as well as maintaining these descriptions on both the switch AND Orion, every time a server is added, moved or deleted.

    -=Cheers=-
    NG
  • Agreed that the port monitoring feature needs to be included..

    Another feature request would be to be able to right click a node/interface in a web browser and enable/disable monitoring of that node/interface. In a multi user environment this is crucial. Our helpdesk does not have access to the actual NPM server but I would like them to be able to acknowledge and/or disable an alert to keep things in focus.
  • I have to agree that fixing popular switches like the cat 6500 would be great. I have also noticed other products like F5 boxes that don't report correctly. To me getting these working correctly would be more important than added functionality.
  • Good idea but my votes are:

    1) Custom MIBS (in the works?)
    2) TRAPS...TRAPS...TRAPS...(whats up with them missing that?)
    3) Fix switch discovery issues (manually naming every port is a pain in the ***!!:)

    -Scooby
  • My 2 cents,

    1. Traps, traps, traps
    2. RMON2 support
    3. Custom Mibs