I've seen it happen a couple of times as well. I usually fix it by deleting the object and recreating it, which is a pain.
I would also like some improved ways of selecting interfaces (hidden or not). How about a popup non-modal dialog with a checkbox for every interface on a device? The interfaces already showing on the map will be checked. The user can check or uncheck the interfaces as desired, and the map will reflect the changes as they happen. There would be a cancel button and an OK button. Of course we're talking about showing and hiding attached networks, not interfaces. About deleting interfaces (attached networks): I don't do it either. When would it be useful to delete an attached network, seeing as how InterMapper will put it back willy-nilly when it feels like it? Oh yeah, when the network wasn't drawn by InterMapper to reflect an SNMP query, but when the network was manually created. Manually created networks won't get redrawn. How about allowing the deletion of manually-created networks, and forbidding the deletion of InterMapper-created networks? -- Doug Weathers, Network Administrator St. Charles Medical Center >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/5/2003 9:31:49 AM >>> I've noticed this problem too but the problem happens so rarely that I've never bothered reporting it. On a related note, what would be **really** useful is a more ergonomic way of selecting hidden interfaces. One our bigger switches I might have 50 to 100 hidden interfaces, many of them virtual. It is very time consuming and confusing to have to display all hidden interfaces to find the one you want to have displayed when a new service comes on line. If I could pick the interface from a pop up list that would save a lot of time. Also I never delete interfaces and so I would prefer it if Intermapper didn't even give me this option. This would remove a source of operator error. At 7:06 AM -0800 11/5/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 11:21:30 +0100 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: "Alain Fontaine (Post master, UCL)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: The interfaces that never reappear >Reply-To: "InterMapper Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >List-Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >X-UBC-Relayed: relayed through mail-relay1.ubc.ca >X-UBC-Scanned: SpamAssassin >X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=5.0 > tests=BAYES_20,FORGED_MUA_EUDORA > version=2.55 >X-Spam-Level: >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) >Status: >Hi, > >This a problem that we encounter for as long as we have been using >InterMapper. It has always been somewhat fuzzy, so we never chased >it seriously. Until today... > >When we don't want to see some interface, we hide the network it >connects to. We don't delete it, since InterMapper will then make it >reappear in some ugly way. When we need to use the interface again, >we select the device and use the 'Show adjacent' command on it. The >problem is that some networks never reappear. OK, using the 'Show >all' command makes them reappear, but... We have some maps with more >than 40 devices, each device having more than 20 interfaces. Most of >those interfaces are normally hidden. If, when one of those hidden >interfaces is needed, the 'Show adjacent' command does not work, >using 'Show all' is almost impossible, since it makes a small >thousand networks pop on the screen. So this problem becomes really >annoying. > >After some testing, I have found the rule governing what makes those >networks so shy, and it is quite simple. If a device has a single >interface connected to a network, 'Show adjacent' applied to it >correctly makes the network reappear. But, if the same device has >two interfaces connecting it to the same network, this network >becomes shy and will not reappear with 'Show adjacent' applied to >the device. Aha. I tried with three, four, and became tired after >nine interfaces. Up that that number, the rule is: if the device is >connected by an even number of interfaces to a given hidden network, >using 'Show adjacent' on the device will not make the network >reappear. For an odd number of interfaces, the network does indeed >reappear. > >One could ask: why are you connecting more that one interface to a >single network ? Well, we usually don't do it. InterMapper does it >all by itself, since its way of connecting newly discovered >interfaces to 'something' is sometimes a bit lunatic. If it decides >to connect a newly discovered interface to an existing hidden >network, both the old and the new interfaces become too shy to ever >show again. Until, of course, Intermapper decides to connect a third >interface to that network, but don't wait too long, because if it >adds a fourth one, you are in trouble again, and so on. > >Releases and co: we have had problems making network reappear for as >long as I can remember, and we purchased InterMapper in 1997. The >problem has been reproduced in version 4.1.2b4, OSX version. > >Does it also happen in other environments ? > >Best regards. >-- > /AF > >____________________________________________________________________ >List archives: >http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/ >To unsubscribe: send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________________________________ List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/ To unsubscribe: send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________________________________ List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/ To unsubscribe: send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
