Excluding IP address ranges in DFM polling

Unanswered Question
Mar 12th, 2007

Is there a way I can exclude IP address ranges in DFM polling? It seems that DFM (or perhaps Campus Manager) is polling end devices behind FastEthernet interfaces. Thank you.

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 4.7 (3 ratings)
Loading.
Joe Clarke Mon, 03/12/2007 - 09:45

Currently, this is not possible. However, DFM 3.0, part of LMS 3.0, will include the ability to selectively manage devices based on name and IP address ranges.

However, if end hosts are being polled (pinged is what I think you mean) this is most likely Campus Manager User Tracking doing its ping sweep. Ping sweeps can be selectively disabled on individual subnets under Campus Manager > Administration > User Tracking Admin > Acquisition > Ping Sweep.

santipongv Mon, 03/12/2007 - 10:05

From Campus Manager > Administration > User Tracking Admin > Acquisition > Ping Sweep, there are available sources appear on the left hand side. Is there a way I can customize subnet in granular details?

Joe Clarke Mon, 03/12/2007 - 10:09

Unfortunately not. These subnets represent the subnets on which users were found. They are limited by the way they are configured in your network.

However, you can configured the ranges of IPs on which Campus will perform Data Collection. If the devices (switches in this case) are not Data Collected, then User Tracking will not be able to acquire end hosts connected to them. Data Collection filters are configured under Campus Manager > Admin > Campus Data Collection > Data Collection Filters.

Note: if you filter out devices here, then users connected to those devices will not show up in User Tracking. If you absolutely can't ping certain end hosts, but they must appear in User Tracking, consider disabling ping sweeps altogether, then make sure your CAM and ARP tables are populated by some other means.

dmitry Sun, 03/25/2007 - 11:41

I was having the same issue with DFM: it discovers the routers with multiple interfaces and only one of these interfaces is IP reachable by the DFM. After discovering DFM starts trying to get to all the IPs and, of course, sets the unreachable alarms.

As it stands with DFM 2.0.8 it is possible to make the entire interface as unmanaged, which produces not always a desired result (I still want to know the interface related info about utilization, errors, status, just do not want to check its IP reachability).

It looks like according to Cisco version 3 of DFM will allow to set IP subnets as unmanaged and yet keep the interfaces that belong to those subnets as still managed.

CCO had a patch for the current versions of DFM ( a perl script) that works with dmctl to set the IPs into unmanaged state.

Actions

This Discussion