Hi Arjen, sorry for my late reply, it's been a really hard work week.
Arjen de Korte wrote:
I very much like the basic concept behind this, this is certainly worth investigating further. I would prefer to make this a separate driver (proposal, netnsm-ups) instead though. The reason is that you could follow the same approach using SNMP (instead of XML) from the UPS, so a more universal approach would be to connect to a snmp-ups or netxml-ups driver on top of the driver being an NSM client.
Apart from the fact that I know nothing about SNMP, I like the separated driver approach too but it seems to me that the solution you are proposing aims to support single UPS setups only (we would need a single NSM client instead, creating connections to multiple NMC, on top of all netxml-ups/snmp-ups drivers that require management as part of a redundant setup). Sorry, I'm not sure I've fully understood your idea, please explain a little bit more how would you connect NSM and SNMP/XML driver and so on. Thank you.
I'm also a little concerned about multiple instances of netxml-ups connecting to the same NMC. Older NMC's probably will not be stable enough with multiple clients querying the XML pages. Older 66102 and 66103 NMC's simply don't have the horsepower needed to support multiple XML clients.
As I own an old 66102 (technical level 02), I can do some testing about this, if needed. However I think that NMC buyers should already know its limits.
An approach might be to start from the 'clone' driver and add the NSM specific code to that. This would allow transparent copying of all information of the underlying base driver (snmp-ups or netxml-ups) and still be able to add the desired info for the outlets (which is really neat of your solution).
This sounds similar to my idea now... I certainly need some more explanation.
BTW, does the SNMP protocol allow the same XML management functionality?
Last, I'm not sure if having the LOCAL configuration is a good idea from a support point of view. Only using the CENTRALIZED configuration would result in fewer options needed in ups.conf, which is easier for system administrators to setup.
For a single PSU computer - single UPS schema it could, maybe, be useful, but I mainly agree with you, even though you already have to specify nothing but the outlet for a CENTRALIZED configuration. Moreover upssched can be instead used, so not a big deal.
Thank you for your attention. Regards, Marco _______________________________________________ Nut-upsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
