Send Netdot-users mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://osl.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/netdot-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Netdot-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. netdot interface_history table (Bassett, Mark)
2. Re: prune_db.pl (Chip Pleasants)
3. Re: netdot interface_history table (Carlos Vicente)
4. Re: prune_db.pl (Carlos Vicente)
5. Migrate information of AdressSpace (Jaime Rafael Cabrera Letona)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 02:02:41 +0000
From: "Bassett, Mark" <[email protected]>
Subject: [Netdot-users] netdot interface_history table
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<b9afe1a22e5a614aac33fec49e4e157c01379...@g4w3293.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi guys, I have an old netdot 0.9.9 server that's been running for quite a
while. It never has done any pruning jobs on the history, so it's quite large.
2.5Gigabytes large to be exact. Running the prune_db is taking forever....
My question is, can I truncate the interface_history table? Will that cause
any side effects to netdot?
The prune script seems to just be issuing per interface delete commands for
modification older than whatever you set at commandline... would it be
problematic to run the same query without specifying an interface?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://osl.uoregon.edu/pipermail/netdot-users/attachments/20140207/ec1f3de7/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 07:14:33 -0500
From: Chip Pleasants <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Netdot-users] prune_db.pl
To: Carlos Vicente <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID:
<cajq5atrg_uhty+g3ojfx3yfwak4ypznyjrilszoh0qvhjz8...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
If I configure a static address assignment in a IP block for say a NAT
addresses on one of firewalls that won't ever get updated and that doesn't
get picked up by netdot will it get pruned?
-Chip
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Carlos Vicente <[email protected]>wrote:
> Correct. Addresses (not blocks) are deleted if they have not been "seen",
> which means, not found in ARP tables nor created/modified in the given
> number of days.
>
> Both "Discoverd" and "Static" addresses are considered.
>
> cv
>
> On Feb 4, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Chip Pleasants <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > To make sure I understand. Addresses are pruned within IP blocks, that
> have not been updated/reached after updatedevices.pl in 90 days or some
> amount of time? Do does it matter if they are Static or Discovered
> addresses? Thanks for the quick response!
> >
> > -Chip
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Carlos Vicente <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Hi Chip,
> >
> > The script today does not remove IP blocks, only addresses.
> >
> > cv
> >
> > On Feb 4, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Chip Pleasants <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hoping someone could provide some helpful tips. Is there a way see
> what IP address blocks would get pruned using the script or any other way?
> I ran the command below, but it didn't provide the information I was
> expecting. I was expecting network 10.0.x.0/24 is older than 90 days
> therefore it would get pruned. I looked at using the advanced sql commands
> but i'm not really knowledgeable in sql commands. I appreciate any
> assistance.
> > >
> > > /usr/local/netdot/bin/prune_db.pl -H -F -A -M -I -p -g -d 90
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://osl.uoregon.edu/pipermail/netdot-users/attachments/20140207/b317ee94/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:27:24 -0500
From: Carlos Vicente <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Netdot-users] netdot interface_history table
To: "Bassett, Mark" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Hi Mark,
I think it would be safe to drop the interface_history table and create it
again.
cv
On Feb 6, 2014, at 9:02 PM, Bassett, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi guys, I have an old netdot 0.9.9 server that?s been running for quite a
> while. It never has done any pruning jobs on the history, so it?s quite
> large. 2.5Gigabytes large to be exact. Running the prune_db is taking
> forever?.
> My question is, can I truncate the interface_history table? Will that cause
> any side effects to netdot?
>
> The prune script seems to just be issuing per interface delete commands for
> modification older than whatever you set at commandline? would it be
> problematic to run the same query without specifying an interface?
> _______________________________________________
> Netdot-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://osl.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/netdot-users
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 10:48:22 -0500
From: Carlos Vicente <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Netdot-users] prune_db.pl
To: Chip Pleasants <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
That?s correct.
cv
On Feb 7, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Chip Pleasants <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I configure a static address assignment in a IP block for say a NAT
> addresses on one of firewalls that won't ever get updated and that doesn't
> get picked up by netdot will it get pruned?
>
> -Chip
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Carlos Vicente <[email protected]> wrote:
> Correct. Addresses (not blocks) are deleted if they have not been ?seen?,
> which means, not found in ARP tables nor created/modified in the given number
> of days.
>
> Both ?Discoverd? and ?Static? addresses are considered.
>
> cv
>
> On Feb 4, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Chip Pleasants <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > To make sure I understand. Addresses are pruned within IP blocks, that have
> > not been updated/reached after updatedevices.pl in 90 days or some amount
> > of time? Do does it matter if they are Static or Discovered addresses?
> > Thanks for the quick response!
> >
> > -Chip
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Carlos Vicente <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > Hi Chip,
> >
> > The script today does not remove IP blocks, only addresses.
> >
> > cv
> >
> > On Feb 4, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Chip Pleasants <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hoping someone could provide some helpful tips. Is there a way see what
> > > IP address blocks would get pruned using the script or any other way? I
> > > ran the command below, but it didn't provide the information I was
> > > expecting. I was expecting network 10.0.x.0/24 is older than 90 days
> > > therefore it would get pruned. I looked at using the advanced sql
> > > commands but i'm not really knowledgeable in sql commands. I appreciate
> > > any assistance.
> > >
> > > /usr/local/netdot/bin/prune_db.pl -H -F -A -M -I -p -g -d 90
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 10:27:15 -0600 (CST)
From: Jaime Rafael Cabrera Letona <[email protected]>
Subject: [Netdot-users] Migrate information of AdressSpace
To: netdot-users <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hello.
How can I migrate only the adress space information?
I have 2 servers with 0.9.10 and 1.0.5 versions respectively.
Regards,
Ja ime Rafael Cabrera Letona
Coordi nador Redes y Comunicaciones
USAC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://osl.uoregon.edu/pipermail/netdot-users/attachments/20140207/dbe75fea/attachment.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: LOGOREDES_peq.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 13272 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://osl.uoregon.edu/pipermail/netdot-users/attachments/20140207/dbe75fea/attachment.jpg
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Netdot-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://osl.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/netdot-users
End of Netdot-users Digest, Vol 63, Issue 3
*******************************************
