- Community Home
- >
- Networking
- >
- Legacy
- >
- Switches, Hubs, Modems
- >
- PCM+ and multihomed devices
Switches, Hubs, and Modems
1748268
Members
3642
Online
108760
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-26-2008 02:40 AM
06-26-2008 02:40 AM
PCM+ and multihomed devices
Hi,
given that PCM+ manages devices that are multihomed by their very nature (beeing routers after all), I wonder why it has so many issues assigning incoming packets to the correct box.
When PCM+ knows a router R by IP X (X beeing on a management VLAN SVI or, let's say, a loopback interface), but R has a connected route to the PCM+, R will send its syslog packets using the source address of the interface that establishes the connected route instead of X. PCM+ then cannot associate that message with R and R's syslog tab stays empty ever after. Same vor SNMP traps.
On the K-platforms that have loopbacks, using the loopback as the management IP (the only sane way to do it if you ask me), the situation is helped a little by the statement
snmp-server trap-source loopback 1
but I cannot find any further
commands that would define the source addresses of syslog (or, for that matter, SNTP, sFLOW etc pp). And there are platforms that have no loopback interface support and nevertheless can route.
Is there a way to solve this correctly?
TIA,
Andre.
given that PCM+ manages devices that are multihomed by their very nature (beeing routers after all), I wonder why it has so many issues assigning incoming packets to the correct box.
When PCM+ knows a router R by IP X (X beeing on a management VLAN SVI or, let's say, a loopback interface), but R has a connected route to the PCM+, R will send its syslog packets using the source address of the interface that establishes the connected route instead of X. PCM+ then cannot associate that message with R and R's syslog tab stays empty ever after. Same vor SNMP traps.
On the K-platforms that have loopbacks, using the loopback as the management IP (the only sane way to do it if you ask me), the situation is helped a little by the statement
snmp-server trap-source loopback 1
but I cannot find any further
commands that would define the source addresses of syslog (or, for that matter, SNTP, sFLOW etc pp). And there are platforms that have no loopback interface support and nevertheless can route.
Is there a way to solve this correctly?
TIA,
Andre.
1 REPLY 1
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-26-2008 03:22 PM
06-26-2008 03:22 PM
Re: PCM+ and multihomed devices
I think you'll need to get onto your ProCurve sales rep and push them for these enhancements. Also mention RADIUS and TACACs requests too!
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP