Hello,
since a few days devices are not showing anymore in the netmap. They do create graphs and a responding to SNMP requests. it concerns some servers (ESX) and firewalls for now, but not all of these?
Anyone has seen this before or knows what is wrong?
Cheers Erik
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:11:38 +0100 Erik kempere@quakerchem.com wrote:
since a few days devices are not showing anymore in the netmap. They do create graphs and a responding to SNMP requests. it concerns some servers (ESX) and firewalls for now, but not all of these?
What happened a few days ago?
Hi,
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 10:45 To: Erik Kemper kempere@quakerchem.com Cc: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:11:38 +0100 Erik kempere@quakerchem.com wrote:
since a few days devices are not showing anymore in the netmap. They do create graphs and a responding to SNMP requests. it concerns some servers (ESX) and firewalls for now, but not all of these?
What happened a few days ago?
-- Morten Brekkevold UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper kempere@quakerchem.com wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.html
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper kempere@quakerchem.com Cc: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.html
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 To: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.htmlhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
Hi,
An update,
When I restore a backup from the 24 November , all looks OK.
It is running 4.7.3
After updating to latest and greatest, I have about 15 isolated devices again…?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:50 To: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.htmlhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
Hello,
I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes.
From: nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 2:50 AM To: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.htmlhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
Hi,
NAV 4.8 includes various changes to the topology analysis code in NAV. One change cleans up previously deducted topology when ports has been re-used for other purposes. The other fixes some buges where NAV would incorrectly deduce that certain port pairs were connected when they in fact were not, and this in term caused NAV to fail to detect the proper topology. Both of these changes could lead to isolated nodes in cases were NAV is not able to detect the correct topology. In order to resolve these issues it would be very useful to have some information about the topology candidates nav has gathered for the ports in question.
Go to the reports overview and click "Report List" and then "Direct neighborship candidates". Click "Filter" and type the sysname of an isolated node in the sysname field and the name of an uplink port in the interface field and press filter. Does the expected upstream device show up in the list? What is in the "source" column.
Then repeat for the expected port on the upstream device. If you could send us the lists of candidates for both ends it would be of great help to debug.
In order to get the best topology results we recommend using lldp on all topology ports, and to _not_ use CDP in mixed Cisco/HP networks
Best regards Sigmund Augdal UNINETT AS
On 01. des. 2017 18:29, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote:
Hello,
I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes.
*From:* nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] *On Behalf Of *Erik Kemper *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2017 2:50 AM *To:* nav-users@uninett.no *Subject:* RE: Netmap
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view.
But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.com mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com http://www.quakerchem.com/
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
*From:* nav-users-request@uninett.no mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] *On Behalf Of *Erik Kemper *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 *To:* nav-users@uninett.no mailto:nav-users@uninett.no *Subject:* RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.com mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.com mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.no mailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.com mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.html https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
Hello,
So I looked at several nodes on both ends. They do show up on either end as a “Candidate neighbor.” However, it does appear that it is using CDP instead of LLDP. Is there a way to force NAV to use LLDP only?
Thanks, Will From: nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Sigmund Augdal Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 12:12 AM To: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
Hi,
NAV 4.8 includes various changes to the topology analysis code in NAV. One change cleans up previously deducted topology when ports has been re-used for other purposes. The other fixes some buges where NAV would incorrectly deduce that certain port pairs were connected when they in fact were not, and this in term caused NAV to fail to detect the proper topology. Both of these changes could lead to isolated nodes in cases were NAV is not able to detect the correct topology. In order to resolve these issues it would be very useful to have some information about the topology candidates nav has gathered for the ports in question.
Go to the reports overview and click "Report List" and then "Direct neighborship candidates". Click "Filter" and type the sysname of an isolated node in the sysname field and the name of an uplink port in the interface field and press filter. Does the expected upstream device show up in the list? What is in the "source" column.
Then repeat for the expected port on the upstream device. If you could send us the lists of candidates for both ends it would be of great help to debug.
In order to get the best topology results we recommend using lldp on all topology ports, and to _not_ use CDP in mixed Cisco/HP networks
Best regards Sigmund Augdal UNINETT AS
On 01. des. 2017 18:29, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote: Hello,
I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes.
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 2:50 AM To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.htmlhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
You should be able to set this in ipdevpoll.conf. I haven’t done this myself, but if you find the section titled [job_topo] and remove “cdp” from the line “plugins: cam lldp cdp”, it just might do the trick for you. Give it a try.
/Marcus W. Linnaeus University
From: nav-users-request@uninett.no on behalf of "William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology" WilliamD@VUSD.SolanoCOE.K12.CA.US Reply-To: "William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology" WilliamD@VUSD.SolanoCOE.K12.CA.US Date: Monday, 4 December 2017 at 17:17 To: Sigmund Augdal sigmund.augdal@uninett.no, "nav-users@uninett.no" nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hello,
So I looked at several nodes on both ends. They do show up on either end as a “Candidate neighbor.” However, it does appear that it is using CDP instead of LLDP. Is there a way to force NAV to use LLDP only?
Thanks, Will From: nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Sigmund Augdal Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 12:12 AM To: nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
Hi,
NAV 4.8 includes various changes to the topology analysis code in NAV. One change cleans up previously deducted topology when ports has been re-used for other purposes. The other fixes some buges where NAV would incorrectly deduce that certain port pairs were connected when they in fact were not, and this in term caused NAV to fail to detect the proper topology. Both of these changes could lead to isolated nodes in cases were NAV is not able to detect the correct topology. In order to resolve these issues it would be very useful to have some information about the topology candidates nav has gathered for the ports in question.
Go to the reports overview and click "Report List" and then "Direct neighborship candidates". Click "Filter" and type the sysname of an isolated node in the sysname field and the name of an uplink port in the interface field and press filter. Does the expected upstream device show up in the list? What is in the "source" column.
Then repeat for the expected port on the upstream device. If you could send us the lists of candidates for both ends it would be of great help to debug.
In order to get the best topology results we recommend using lldp on all topology ports, and to _not_ use CDP in mixed Cisco/HP networks
Best regards Sigmund Augdal UNINETT AS
On 01. des. 2017 18:29, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote: Hello,
I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes.
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 2:50 AM To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[id:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.htmlhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
NAV should prefer LLDP over CDP for these things. If the candidate neighbor list shows both LLDP and CDP entries NAV should use the LLDP data. However NAV will check that the LLDP data matches in both ends. If there are matching LLDP records in both ends and NAV does not use them, then there must be a bug in NAV. If there are no LLDP records in the candidate neighbor list then it is probably turned off on the devices.
More things to consider: Are you using link aggregation for the uplinks on the isolated devices? If so, check the underlaying physical links and see if NAV has connected these properly.
What kind of devices are involved in the links that NAV no longer detects topology for? Some HP devices seems to receive CDP messages and present them as LLDP. Also most non-cisco devices can broadcast CDP messages resulting in false topologies being detected in mixed cisco/non-cisco networks.
Are you sure the detected topology NAV presented in the netmap before the upgrade were actually correct? In our office network the topology NAV did present in the netmap before 4.8 were quite full of errors and nobody here had noticed...
Best regards
Sigmund Augdal
On 04. des. 2017 17:17, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote:
Hello,
So I looked at several nodes on both ends. They do show up on either end as a “Candidate neighbor.” However, it does appear that it is using CDP instead of LLDP. Is there a way to force NAV to use LLDP only?
Thanks,
Will
*From:*nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] *On Behalf Of *Sigmund Augdal *Sent:* Monday, December 4, 2017 12:12 AM *To:* nav-users@uninett.no *Subject:* Re: Netmap
Hi,
NAV 4.8 includes various changes to the topology analysis code in NAV. One change cleans up previously deducted topology when ports has been re-used for other purposes. The other fixes some buges where NAV would incorrectly deduce that certain port pairs were connected when they in fact were not, and this in term caused NAV to fail to detect the proper topology. Both of these changes could lead to isolated nodes in cases were NAV is not able to detect the correct topology. In order to resolve these issues it would be very useful to have some information about the topology candidates nav has gathered for the ports in question.
Go to the reports overview and click "Report List" and then "Direct neighborship candidates". Click "Filter" and type the sysname of an isolated node in the sysname field and the name of an uplink port in the interface field and press filter. Does the expected upstream device show up in the list? What is in the "source" column.
Then repeat for the expected port on the upstream device. If you could send us the lists of candidates for both ends it would be of great help to debug.
In order to get the best topology results we recommend using lldp on all topology ports, and to _not_ use CDP in mixed Cisco/HP networks
Best regards Sigmund Augdal UNINETT AS
On 01. des. 2017 18:29, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote:
Hello, I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes. *From:* nav-users-request@uninett.no <mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no> [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] *On Behalf Of *Erik Kemper *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2017 2:50 AM *To:* nav-users@uninett.no <mailto:nav-users@uninett.no> *Subject:* RE: Netmap Hi, They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out? Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards, Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.com <mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> I quakerchem.com <http://www.quakerchem.com/> Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01 *From:* nav-users-request@uninett.no <mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no> [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] *On Behalf Of *Erik Kemper *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 *To:* nav-users@uninett.no <mailto:nav-users@uninett.no> *Subject:* RE: Netmap Hi, Okido, will do! (Did not see that HowTo.. 😊) Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards, Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.com <mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> I quakerchem.com Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01 -----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.com <mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com>> Cc: nav-users@uninett.no <mailto:nav-users@uninett.no> Subject: Re: Netmap On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.com <mailto:kempere@quakerchem.com>> wrote: > Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run? I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed. The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use. In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms. [1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.html <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=> -- Morten Brekkevold UNINETT QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
Hello,
These are all HP Procurve devices. And yea the detected topology in netmap before 4.8 was correct. I was running a back-up version of 4.7.1, but I just updated to 4.8.2 so I’ll see what happens.
From: Sigmund Augdal [mailto:sigmund.augdal@uninett.no] Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2017 1:30 AM To: William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology WilliamD@VUSD.SolanoCOE.K12.CA.US; nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
NAV should prefer LLDP over CDP for these things. If the candidate neighbor list shows both LLDP and CDP entries NAV should use the LLDP data. However NAV will check that the LLDP data matches in both ends. If there are matching LLDP records in both ends and NAV does not use them, then there must be a bug in NAV. If there are no LLDP records in the candidate neighbor list then it is probably turned off on the devices.
More things to consider: Are you using link aggregation for the uplinks on the isolated devices? If so, check the underlaying physical links and see if NAV has connected these properly.
What kind of devices are involved in the links that NAV no longer detects topology for? Some HP devices seems to receive CDP messages and present them as LLDP. Also most non-cisco devices can broadcast CDP messages resulting in false topologies being detected in mixed cisco/non-cisco networks.
Are you sure the detected topology NAV presented in the netmap before the upgrade were actually correct? In our office network the topology NAV did present in the netmap before 4.8 were quite full of errors and nobody here had noticed...
Best regards
Sigmund Augdal
On 04. des. 2017 17:17, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote:
Hello,
So I looked at several nodes on both ends. They do show up on either end as a “Candidate neighbor.” However, it does appear that it is using CDP instead of LLDP. Is there a way to force NAV to use LLDP only?
Thanks, Will From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Sigmund Augdal Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 12:12 AM To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
Hi,
NAV 4.8 includes various changes to the topology analysis code in NAV. One change cleans up previously deducted topology when ports has been re-used for other purposes. The other fixes some buges where NAV would incorrectly deduce that certain port pairs were connected when they in fact were not, and this in term caused NAV to fail to detect the proper topology. Both of these changes could lead to isolated nodes in cases were NAV is not able to detect the correct topology. In order to resolve these issues it would be very useful to have some information about the topology candidates nav has gathered for the ports in question.
Go to the reports overview and click "Report List" and then "Direct neighborship candidates". Click "Filter" and type the sysname of an isolated node in the sysname field and the name of an uplink port in the interface field and press filter. Does the expected upstream device show up in the list? What is in the "source" column.
Then repeat for the expected port on the upstream device. If you could send us the lists of candidates for both ends it would be of great help to debug.
In order to get the best topology results we recommend using lldp on all topology ports, and to _not_ use CDP in mixed Cisco/HP networks
Best regards Sigmund Augdal UNINETT AS
On 01. des. 2017 18:29, William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology wrote: Hello,
I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes.
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 2:50 AM To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
They show up when I select “isolated” in the view. But how they got isolated, I cannot figure out?
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper Senior Datacenter Engineer
[cid:TWCBFHKXFKRH.IMAGE_1.BMP]
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694 kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.comhttp://www.quakerchem.com/ Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
From: nav-users-request@uninett.nomailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no [mailto:nav-users-request@uninett.no] On Behalf Of Erik Kemper Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:25 To: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: RE: Netmap
Hi,
Okido, will do!
(Did not see that HowTo.. 😊)
Met vriendelijke groet/ Kind regards,
Erik Kemper
Senior Datacenter Engineer
Quaker Chemical B.V. I Industrieweg 7 I 1422 AH Uithoorn I The Netherlands
T: +31 (0)297 544430 I F: +31 (0)297 544694
kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com I quakerchem.com
Commercial Register Amsterdam No: 33.109.151 I VAT no: NL 001277613 B01
-----Original Message----- From: Morten Brekkevold [mailto:morten.brekkevold@uninett.no] Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 11:12 To: Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> Cc: nav-users@uninett.nomailto:nav-users@uninett.no Subject: Re: Netmap
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 09:46:42 +0000 Erik Kemper <kempere@quakerchem.commailto:kempere@quakerchem.com> wrote:
Nothing special, just the regular weekly update run?
I don't know what "the regular weekly update run" entails, so I still don't know what changed.
The minimum amount of information we need to make sense of a problem report is at least the NAV version in use.
In your case, I'd suggest reading through [1] and come back with some more detailed information about your system and your symptoms.
[1] https://nav.uninett.no/doc/howto/debugging-topology.htmlhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nav.uninett.no_doc_howto_debugging-2Dtopology.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=F5qNGIc8vBNKKqPbpKxOcFhXsOwF7YYLtYbYjCsgcyQ&r=LAbkUnAQd69GuespFDkbTRHs9hRt_gzLVbEy3tsSudk&m=BDeQW03YSOlSf_bZ8ZgnsEToRGk2qupwxypGRysCt1k&s=o7VDldPaIv9uVodAiV56c2zJvJMnlKr6-WaOIFP1mwE&e=
--
Morten Brekkevold
UNINETT
QUAKER CHEMICAL CORPORATION DISCLAIMER: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 17:29:27 +0000 "William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology" WilliamD@VUSD.SolanoCOE.K12.CA.US wrote:
I am also having issues with isolated nodes in netmap. I updated to 4.8.1, and now I have unconnected nodes.
The topology detection algorithm _did_ change in 4.8.1, as announced, so it is only expected that some issues would arise.
We'll have to conduct some internal tests, but I would like for you and Erik to provide more specific data.
When you know that device A and B are connected, but they do not appear as such in NAV, please do the following:
Please report the type of devices and the nature of the link between them.
Find the two interfaces you know to be linked (browse them in NAV/ipdevinfo). In the case of LACP/bonding, browse all the involved interfaces, physical and virtual, as it varies whether devices report topology information for the physical ports or the virtually bonded interfaces.
In the ipdevinfo "Connection" table, what appears as the connected IP device and port of these interfaces, and do they correspond to real life at all?
If they do not correspond to the real world, please click the "external link" symbol in the "To IP device" row. This will show you the report of topology candidate information found on this port by NAV. Please post an intact version of these reports, so we can see if there is any candidate data, and whether the data comes from CAM, CDP or LLDP.
(The point being that in any report about incorrect topology, we need a detailed report about the expected data vs. the actual data. Reports that amount to "it doesn't work" are more likely to be ignored on a busy day).
-
Erik -
Erik Kemper
-
Marcus Westin -
Morten Brekkevold -
Sigmund Augdal -
William Daly - Network Specialist, VUSD Technology