IMC 5.1SP1 will not save file in software library, gives fine not found or filename too long.

[UberMac]

Trying to save simple Procurve switch software, fails with above error. Upgraded to 5.2 and does not help. However installed 5.2 as trial and it does not have problem. Following in log:

2013-04-08 00:02:26.626 [INFO (0)] [THREAD(5312)] backup from file begin.
2013-04-08 00:02:27.437 [INFO (0)] [THREAD(5312)] backup from file end.
2013-04-08 00:02:31.266 [ERROR (-1)] [THREAD(5316)] [CUpgTool::copyFile] Failed to create dst file: C:\Program Files\iMC/server/data/image\I_10_101.swi
2013-04-08 00:02:31.266 [WARNING (-100)] [THREAD(5316)] moveFile( C:\Program Files\iMC/server/tmp\I_10_101.swi , C:\Program Files\iMC/server/data/image\I_10_101.swi ) failed, we will sleep 5 second, then try again.
2013-04-08 00:02:36.266 [WARNING (-100)] [THREAD(5316)] moveFile( C:\Program Files\iMC/server/tmp\I_10_101.swi , C:\Program Files\iMC/server/data/image\I_10_101.swi ) again.
2013-04-08 00:02:36.266 [ERROR (-1)] [THREAD(5316)] [CUpgTool::copyFile] Failed to create dst file: C:\Program Files\iMC/server/data/image\I_10_101.swi
2013-04-08 00:02:36.266 [WARNING (-100)] [THREAD(5316)] moveFile( C:\Program Files\iMC/server/tmp\I_10_101.swi , C:\Program Files\iMC/server/data/image\I_10_101.swi ) failed.

Anyone have possible fix?

A related question, because I have had a ticket in with HP support on this for over a week with no help.

1. Does software update not work with A series switches. It shows all my Procurve but not my ASeries.

2. Does the Most current software not work with Procurve in the Configuration page of the switch. Works for my a series but not for several Procurves.

Is IMC even viable, for a expensive piece of software I see little evedence other than in this one forum that anyone uses it, poor HP support, poor docs, and major bugs.

[LindsayHill]

I have seen vaguely similar behaviour around 5.1 SP1 days, although I didn't dig too deeply into it. This was when I was trying to upload a software image from my desktop to IMC. From what I saw, the upload used a temporary filename, and it later failed to find that filename. If I manually copied the file to server\tmp (with the original filename), it would then see it, and copy it across correctly.

Looking back at my notes, the relevant log entries were a little different. Your issue looks more like either space or permissions issue. Probably permissions, something to do with the destination directory imc/server/data/image/

Regards question 1, are you referring to live update within IMC, which pulls a list of new versions from HP's website? Or have you manually imported the file, and you're trying to push it out?

For question 2, "most current version" doesn't seem to work for all manufacturers, but it has worked for the ProCurve systems I've tried. One thing that can trip you up is that you need to make sure that the image is marked as being applicable to ALL variants - e.g. a 3560-24 might use the same image as a 3560-48, but will probably need to explicitly tell IMC that. It's not enough to just import an image from the 3560-24, and expect it to know it applies to the 48-port model. Not saying that's the case here, but it is worth considering.

On the last point, yes, I believe it's viable. It's not perfect, but what I like is that the product is showing rapid development, with regular releases of new features. I've spoken with the Product Managers for IMC, and I like their long term vision. It's not free/Open Source, but it's very cheap compared to other full-featured network management products I work with - such as NNMi from HP Software. If you just want monitoring, there's a lot of solutions out there for that. If you want full management - change, configuration, compliance, etc. - then there's not many good options, and almost none of them are cheap.

Currently it's not widely known, but it should be. We're trying to change some of that at www.netopscommunity.net - you're welcome to join in there for help with IMC. 

Docs are generally pretty good - what sort of documentation are you looking for? The online help plus the admin guide PDF covers most things you need. 

What 'major bugs' are you striking? Can't say we can fix them, but I like to hear about other problems people are facing, to make sure it doesn't affect my customers.

On the support note, yes, it can be challenging getting support cases through to the right people. Once it gets escalated to the R&D engineers, they're usually very helpful. Getting to that level can be painful. Hopefully that will change.

 - northlandboy

lkhill.com

[UberMac]

Thank you for the input. I think I have figured out atleast why I thought the 5.2 upgrade did not fix the issue. It seems that when the update ZIP file is downloaded IMC somehow extracts and imports the .swi file into the Software lirary but keeps the original name. All I know is I removed all files from the library and now it is saving files. (And yes I originally made sure the file was not already present in the folder-I would hpe if it was I would just get a duplicate file error).

Question 1 was refering to pulling new versions. It seems to me that a product like iMC which came over with the 3Com(H3C) buyout would support 3Com(H3C) switches in this simple regard. Yes it could be simply a non existant file on the repository end but still in my opinion no excuse.

Question 2 again seems strange that Live update downloads would work for Procurve and different varients but this would not for my Procurve switches and I did make sure to mark all varients. Again to me it is strange that is recognizes the Procurve switches for a download but not for the most current version.

My concern is that generally I look for the community around the products I buy, and if there is not much of a community then I wonder how well supported the product is going to be. As for cost and bugs what I am saying is the simple saving of files, searching for updates for switches in your inventory and that are part of your product line, and showing the multiple versions ar major becasue these are relativley simple things that it should so without a wimper. As for cost when you add multiple modules it does add up.  I like much of what I see but would like to see less of all the add on modules and more core functionality being made solid.

Like really do I want to lock my self into a 5k UAC module or just use a separate suystem that has some sommunity support. With Procurve manager on basicly maintenance mode and it's limited functuality with A series. What other options are ther to simply manage, deploy, and backup these switches.

[LindsayHill]

---

@UberMac wrote:

Like really do I want to lock my self into a 5k UAC module or just use a separate suystem that has some sommunity support. With Procurve manager on basicly maintenance mode and it's limited functuality with A series. What other options are ther to simply manage, deploy, and backup these switches.

---

PCM+ is dead. IMC Basic has replaced it. Use that if all you want is simple monitoring and config backups for < 50 nodes. Cost somewhere around $1k. 

If you want monitoring, there's hundreds of free solutions. I'd probably go with Opmantek. For free backups, use RANCID.

But if you want full config mgmt, or NetFlow, or various other enhanced functions, you're almost certainly going to have to pay, or write it yourself. Figure out your costs to do that - it might make sense for you to write your own scripts. Or it might not. Depends how complex your needs are.

Other alternatives in what I think of as the mid range are products like Solarwinds, ManageEngine, and Whatsup Gold. Those offer various degrees of support for configuration management for HP switches. I think they all offer free trials. Try them out, see if they work better for you.

If you've got cash to spare, check out tools like HP ANM (NNMi + NA + iSPI), or Entuity.

[UberMac]

Thank you for the input. It is helpful.

Biggest thing I am trying to determine is the "staying power" of IMC. I don't mind paying for something and really prefer to pay more for something that works and is worth investing in. The problem I have found with IMC is a huge lack of knowledge about it, and where it is headed. I am not a big fan of Solarwinds, have used it and dislike for following:

1. Every other week have to fix a issue with the collectors, or the syslog connection.

2. They populate every port for NTA forcing you to disable all the ports syou do not care about.

3. Above seems like a sales ploy to get you to license for more ports.

4. I get annoyed at a sales call every end of quarter or some new little piece they never fully integrate in.

Well looks like I found some local help with IMC and am evaluating now.

[Peter_Debruyne]

Hi,

Like mentioned before in earlier post, IMC is part of the CORE networking portfolio now (PCM which is now end of life is another proof of this), so it is certainly going to stay for the next years.

I know is sounds strange, that as a former h3c/3com product it does not automatically gets the firmware images from the site, but it really was developed as a more generic NMS, which assumes that the admin will get the images from various sources (cisco, hp, etc) and import them into IMC.

But your comment is valid that they should not be afraid of adding some extra help for their own products into IMC.

Best regards,Peter

[LindsayHill]

---

@UberMac wrote:

Biggest thing I am trying to determine is the "staying power" of IMC. 

---

You're completely right to worry about that. Ultimately the upfront costs are unimportant compared to the investment you put in. You don't want to have to throw it away, because the vendor moves in a different direction.

Personally I like the product, and having spoken to the people in charge of it, I'm upbeat about the future. HP does have a challenge with the overlap between IMC and their other network management software from the HP Software group. Currently they're in two different parts of the business, but at some point, someone needs to make some tough calls.

I think that the future of network management is going to look very different to what we do now. I don't know exactly what SDN will shake down to mean, but the way we look at networking will change. The toolsets are going to have to change to keep up with this. I think that IMC has a greater capacity to adapt to these changes than the 'legacy' products. Being tied to the HP Networking side of the business is a good thing, as HP Networking is moving in an interesting direction. I'd love to see an OpenFlow controller become part of IMC, giving us true visibility and control. Hopefully not too far away.

Good luck with the eval.