I didn't realize until this post that it was available for Windows. I'm having all sorts of problems with Informant, on 2 of my boxes, and will be looking into this stat, and report back.
On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 09:20 -0400, James Pulver wrote: > Has anyone looked into using Net-SNMP on windows with Zenoss? Will it > get us more than Informant? > > -- > James Pulver > Information Technology Area Supervisor > LEPP Computer Group > Cornell University > > > > Jones Steve-R4AAJL wrote: > > I've been talking to the Zenoss management - and I have filled them in > > on the realities of their current pricing model and I believe/hope they > > are looking at re-vamping their model. > > > > Serious management shops look at system management in two planes: Simple > > management and Complex Management. This is largely based upon the > > criticality of the systems. If I were looking at HP Openview I would > > sink some money in high cost agents for a very few systems, then rely on > > SNMP agents for everything else. Network hardware management is another > > issue -- it really should be commodity pricing. > > > > Honestly, in the Linux realm and now in the Windows realm, Net-SNMP can > > do just about anything one would desirefrom an agent standpoint. The > > only missing piece is Net-SNMP config management. > > > > BTW, if you read the Zenoss website closely it will be no surprise that > > Zenoss does have two different software offerings. They actually > > provide a feature comparison. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Pulver > >> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 2:45 PM > >> To: General discussion of using zenoss system > >> Subject: Re: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > >> > >> This does worry me. I picked Zenoss over other products > >> because of its > >> open nature. I don't really like the idea of there being parts locked > >> away from the community, especially as I've seen how good a > >> job OSS does > >> with many many other products. > >> > >> I don't, of course, begrudge Zenoss making money. And I like > >> the idea of > >> Zenpacks as purchasable products - I'd like it more if I could, say, > >> purchase a Zenpack for $500 or something, rather than a > >> subscription all > >> or nothing sort of thing. > >> > >> I'd also like some clarification on the licensing - say, can > >> I buy the > >> 50 system enterprise, and register say, 50 critical servers, and then > >> monitor 1,000 more with only community support for getting > >> them to work? > >> > >> I guess my biggest issue is cost, so I'll take what I can get > >> for free. > >> Especially as I have no idea what I'd really gain from > >> Enterprise - most > >> of it looks like stuff I don't need. > >> > >> -- > >> James Pulver > >> Information Technology Area Supervisor > >> LEPP Computer Group > >> Cornell University > >> > >> > >> > >> Todd Davis wrote: > >>> What concerns me about this is that it sounds like they are > >> planning on > >>> splintering the Core/Enterprise versions even further. Some of the > >>> items listed are the types of things that the community has been > >>> requesting for some time. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Although I have no problem with a company making some money from a > >>> product, even an open source one, Zenoss Enterprise pricing > >> is a little > >>> steep at a minimum $5000/yr. I might be inclined to look > >> at Enterprise > >>> in some situations, like the multi-dashboard, but without > >> seeing how it > >>> works I don't know if I can justify it. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Also, I'd like to see them offer some of the features (eg. > >> ZenPacks) as > >>> an a'la carte option. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of > >> *Jones Steve-R4AAJL > >>> *Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2007 8:37 AM > >>> *To:* General discussion of using zenoss system; General > >> discussion of > >>> using zenoss system > >>> *Subject:* RE: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Tim, this issue with that roadmap is that it is only available to > >>> Enterprise customers and not pre-viewable to normal Internet > >>> Interlopers. I personally would like to see a version of > >> Enterprise > >>> that is installable and runnable by anyone who wishes to > >> download it. > >>> Clearly, the logistics are cumbersome but many of your > >> competitors have > >>> this very model. > >>> > >>> Steve Jones > >>> Engineering Compute \\ - - // > >>> Freescale Semiconductor ( @ @ ) > >>> > >> ----------------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo---------------------------- > >>> .oooO > >>> --------------------------- ( )-- Oooo. > >> --------------------------- > >>> Office:512-996-6708 \ ( ( ) > >>> Pager: 888-944-7522 \_) ) / > >>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (_/ > >>> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >> ---------- > >>> > >>> > >>> This e-mail, and any associated attachments have been classified as: > >>> [ ] Freescale Semiconductor General Business > >>> [X] Freescale Semiconductor Internal Use Only > >>> [ ] Freescale Semiconductor Confidential Proprietary > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Tim Galligan > >>> Sent: Fri 8/10/2007 7:44 AM > >>> To: 'General discussion of using zenoss system' > >>> Subject: RE: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > >>> > >>> We (Zenoss) are very focused on our MSP customers and are doing the > >>> following to support the requirements of Multi-Tenancy: > >>> > >>> 1) We added the Global Dashboard in Enterprise Edition V2.0 which > >>> enables MSP to easily manage multiple Zenoss Server > >> instances from one > >>> dashboard. Using this approach our MSP's are able to put up a Zenoss > >>> Server for each customer, provide them access to the > >> information and then > >>> use the Global Dashboard in the NOC to see a consolidated > >> view of all > >>> customers. > >>> > >>> 2) With Enterprise Release V2.1 we will be adding a > >> restricted READONLY > >>> view which will allow you to define exactly what managed > >> resources you > >>> want a user (customer) to see and they will have a view of only that > >>> information in a readonly mode. V2.1 is targeted for release in late > >>> September. Enterprise subscribers can get early access as needed. > >>> > >>> 3) Roadmap for Enterprise Edition Release: We will > >> support full device > >>> ACL's. This way you will be able to setup user (customer) as an > >>> administrator or user and you will be able to specify the managed > >>> resources they can see. The difference between the #2 and > >> #3 is that you > >>> can provide someone with full admin capabilities for > >> specific managed > >>> resources with the device ACL's > >>> > >>> Tim > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jones > >> Steve-R4AAJL > >>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 10:26 PM > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: RE: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > >>> > >>> This company has a product that does what you are asking > >>> > >> http://manageengine.adventnet.com/products/opmanager/msp/index > >> .html. We > >>> looked at it but had to drop the investigation because the > >> tool could > >>> not handle supernetted networks and appeared to be more stable on a > >>> Windows platform. Your mileage may differ from ours -- we > >> haven't looked > >>> at it about 8 months. > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of oms > >>>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 6:39 PM > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Subject: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> I have been trying out Zenoss for a little while now and have > >>>> been comparing it with a few competing products > >>>> (Centreo/Nagios, Groundwork etc). > >>>> > >>>> I really like the look and feel to Zenoss but unfortunately I > >>>> dont think it can do what we are looking for. > >>>> > >>>> We (and upstart NOC type company) will be offering services > >>>> to multiple clients, each of which will have a single user. > >>>> What we require from our NMS is that we can configure, for > >>>> example, 50 clients each of which having 50 or so devices. > >>>> > >>>> We need to keep each client completely separated from the > >>>> other yet only run one instance of the Zenoss software. We > >>>> will most likely be purchasing Zenoss Enterprise or the > >>>> equivalent but the above requirement is a must. > >>>> > >>>> I have been playing with Zenoss and trying to replicate what > >>>> I have mentioned above by creating "organizers" in various > >>>> ways, yet it seems very restrictive to do this and there is > >>>> some information leakage between the clients (i.e even though > >>>> I restricted a certain user by only allowing them to view a > >>>> certain "Group", that user still saw information from other > >>>> groups in certain cases). > >>>> > >>>> You may think of as an ISP or similar where our clients will > >>>> have duplicated IP addressing schemes which we need to > >>>> monitor through separated VPN's. > >>>> > >>>> We can do this magic at the routers (NAT etc) but there is > >>>> obviously no way in Zenoss to store two devices (say > >>>> 10.1.1.1) for two different users....or is there? Each client > >>>> will need to log on to a "web portal" of sorts and access > >>>> information ONLY pertinent to them. > >>>> > >>>> If Zenoss cannot do this, would you be kind enough to > >>>> recommend one that can? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks in advance, and thanks for an awesome product. > >>>> > >>>> btw- the above was tested on 2.0.3) > >>>> > >>>> oms > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------ > >>>> unset > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -------------------- m2f -------------------- > >>>> > >>>> Read this topic online here: > >>>> http://community.zenoss.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=9785#9785 > >>>> > >>>> -------------------- m2f -------------------- > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> zenoss-users mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> zenoss-users mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> zenoss-users mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >> ---------- > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> zenoss-users mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > >> _______________________________________________ > >> zenoss-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > zenoss-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > _______________________________________________ > zenoss-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users _______________________________________________ zenoss-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users
