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.

What we are working on for UDT ...

Now that UDT 1.0 is out the door, we have a whole slew of fun things we are working on to make it better!

 

  1. User information from Active Directory
  2. Better topology information (using CDP) to more accurately determine endpoint locations 
  3. Expanded schema for Alerts and Reports
  4. More details about endpoints connected to wireless networks  (this has been pushed for consideration in a release further in the future).
  5. More integration between SolarWinds products (NPM and IPAM)
  6. Bug fixes and other necessary enhancements
PLEASE NOTE:  We are working on these items based on this priority order, but this is NOT a commitment that all of these enhancements will make the next release.  We are working on a number of other smaller features in parallel.   If you have comments or questions on any of these items (e.g. how would it work?) or would like to be included in a preview demo, please let us know!
  • Couple of things I would like to see:

    • More control over the table that is shown when we search for IP's or MAC's. Currently, I can change the number of items per page, but the page only shows 10 items at a time, and is NOT sizeable.
    • Search by VLAN
    • PDF Export needs improvemets. Half the time I export a UDT search, I have items on screen, but the PDF is empty.
    • Add Export to Excel and/or direct Printer support.

    Thank you.

  • Thanks for the feedback Don. 

    Are there any other enhancements to the search results page you would like to see? One ideas we are considering is adding the Port Discovery advanced options to the search results so people could parse through all of the available data easier (and add an option for VLAN).

    On the PDF problems, I assume you are referring to the search results. Unfortunately, this is a limitation on the type of grid that is used and is a known issue. Most people can get the data they need by exporting to CSV. When you say export to Excel, does it make a big difference for you to be able to export to .XLS instead of CVS?

    Mav

  • call me blind, but I dont  have any option for exporting to a CSV. Just "Export to PDF" option that shows up on the search page.  Is there some checkbox in the config I missed?

  • Mav this is a great list of things.  As I had mentioned on Thwack before the potential for this module is great.

     

    One thing I would like to see is something you mentioned somewhat on your list.  If you are indeed going to use CDP, then why not take that just 1 step further and create another useful function.

    How about creating a network map from the CDP and port/mac info?  Not one to be pretty and flashy but a functional one.  I often time have to crawl a network and go from switch to switch when troubleshooting just to verify what was documented.

    But if I could pull up a site or subnet and see how they are connected that would be truly awesome.  That would save tons of time across several different people here.

  • Donald, we would certainly like to get there, but adding support for CDP is the first step and that is what we are focused on now. Once we have the better topology, obviously it makes sense to show it in a graphical format for users.

    Mav

  • dclick--

    In the toolbar of the Search Results grid itself, you should find several buttons.  One is the 'Export as File' option which will export your current search results to a CSV file.

    NOTE: at present this exports ALL records in every page of your search results; not just the current displayed page (or even selected items for that matter).

    Hope this helps Don?

    Regards,

    Steve

  • There seems to be a Cisco preference which is understandable since they dominate the Network switch market, but can we see the use of the standard based LLDP?

    Cisco also supports LLDP so the use of LLDP will have a significant impact on dissimilar network infrastructures.

    thx

    Hank

  • Hank,

    Great feedback!

    For the first release of UDT we focused on HP and Cisco support. However, we tried to leverage industry standards where possible to get broader vendor support. I only mentioned CDP up there but LLDP is something we are also looking into. CDP is just slightly higher priority and I didn't want to offer a lot more than we can deliver :-)

    Mav

  • FormerMember
    0 FormerMember

    We would like to see some better support for IPT devices, when we see a device in UDT it shows as not directly connected because it is connected to the internal switch on a Cisco IPT device therefore when searching for devices it brings back a number of different results because we can't lock it down to directly connected.

    See great potential for this product, the inclusion of CDP is a must for us because it is taking too long to trawl through our larger Cisco switch stacks, hopefully CDP will speed up this process.

  • Jon,

    There are some fixes available in an upcoming service release that should address the IPT issues. I'll make sure you get this when it is available.

    Regarding discovery taking long, this is actually an issue with the Orion Core Discovery. They are trying to get this fixed for their next release. In the meantime, the UDT team is continuing to research better topology detection mechanisms (including CDP).

    Mav