I've marked this for the PM to review.
Thx for your feedback,
As always, we appreciate constructive feedback. We are working on scheduling a User Experience review with Donald to make sure we can address his concerns. Any customer is welcome to provide information to help us make the products better at any time.
We ask that everyone maintain a respectful tone on the forums. We discourage customers from talking about self flagellation or violence towards others. Help us understand your problem, and we'll help you solve it.
I have been working IPAM migration from eng toolset and this post made me laugh. i needed a good laugh because IPAM should get you away from using excel spreadsheets right? well not if your static reserved ips all of a suddent get wiped out of the system if they dont ping for 2 days due to a short transient period. Back to excel i go.
as we discussed in other thread I still believe that there is a solution for you:
1) mark addresses as reserved and exclude them from polling via "edit" option of particular IP like this:
This cause that you will always see address as reserved but it won't be polled (so you won't see updates according to end-point device like MAC)
2) you may use transient period extension and extend default interval up-to infinite time which will cause that your IP addresses never "expires". It's not perfect but it will keep polling also for your reserved addresses.
I can still see benefit using IPAM instead of excel spreadsheets - for instance DHCP and user delegation is something that you can't do there. But I created customer feature request for the case you mentioned - having Reserved IP and keep polling data (like MAC address, host name, etc.)
I'm open for a discussion so if there are more users that see current situation around "reserved" addresses as not sufficient, please talk to me.
has there been any further developments on improvign IPAM regards this thread.or is it still to increase "transient period" to infinite time and manually edit reserved ips in ipam to reflect accurately the usage on your ips on all subnets
i have a lot of linux boxes with AIX firewalls on the servers which dont pick up the ips for that server on a scan
any feedback would be appreciated
I guess that your linux boxes behind the firewall where there are other machines in the same subnet that respond to icmp/snmp correct? For this case, it's still valid that the workaround with transient period is the best way to go. We are now in the process of evaluating of these cases and trying to find the best solution for situation like you have.
From your perspective, what would be the ideal state?