Net-SNMP on Windows, with the "Windows Extension Install" exposes
everything the Windows SNMP service does AND everything that a normal
UNIX/Linux Net-SNMP install does, including CPU, etc. that are normally
only accessible using a 3rd party program. In Zenoss, if you model it as
a Linux box, you'll get the CPU and stuff, as a Windows box, it's
looking for all of the Informant extensions, and thus isn't finding the
CPU. Obviously a template fix is in order.

On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 09:35 -0400, Matthew Keller wrote:
> 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

_______________________________________________
zenoss-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users

Reply via email to