Subject: RE: Notifications != alarms

From: "Ayers, Mike" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 15:36:22 -0600

> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email-masked]]
>
> <soap>
> Some background: We have recently written scripts for our Jasmin RFC
> 2592 implementation which monitor the health of our systems and
> services.  These scripts detect alarm conditions and we have written
> an alarm MIB along the ITU model to actually export the alarm records
> via SNMP.  We would be happy to adopt a standard solution for that -
> but if it requires us to define notifications for all the alarms we
> detect in our scripts (or even to introduce new alarm type specific
> MIBs), then our interest goes quickly down. We would also love to have
> a history of recent alarms since our scripts are actually kind of
> mid-level managers that run autonomously most of the time.
> </soap>

	Thanks, Juergen!

	I have been pushing for an alarm model which does not require
notifications (but can work with them as well) all along, but this is now
the real life example that I can beat people over the head with
(figuratively, of course!).  A deployed alarm system driven entirely by
polling, yes?  Cool!

/|/|ike

---

From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 15:03:09 -0800

HI,

It should be obvious, that as Mike says...

 A deployed alarm system driven entirely by polling.

This has to be supported first, because you may not receive
a notification due to:
1) rate limiting of notification generation
2) notification filtering and/or access control
3) network drops
4) receiver overload/not available.

Regards,
/david t. perkins