Hi Stephen,
I can't as well, but will certainly spend some time considering that.
One question though, let's say I have a device that is connected to another 5 devices, and all the links are live-links.
If it goes down, I should expect - using the current logic - to have 6 alarms (1 device down + 5 bad links), right?
At the same time, if I put that single device in maintenance before-hand, I will not get any alarms. Now, it seems to me that Spectrum is using one suppressing logic for the device not responding to polls and another one for bad link alarms when one of the peers is in maintenance.
It could be that, as
@Rajashekar Allala suggested, this is related with the fact that I have modified the 0x10d11 alarm to add the interface name to it's title.
I will try to simulate this condition in lab and see what happens.
Best regards,
------------------------------
Marcelo Zacchi
CA Spectrum consultant
Nets Denmark
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-05-2020 10:00 AM
From: Stephen Warne
Subject: Bad Link x Device not responding to polls - Correlation
Hi Marcelo
That's sort of my point, using a policy to set all links to live links isn't something I would personally recommend. I can't think of an automation/policy rule to stop/remove the live links, or change the alerting behaviour, for just the spoke connections.
Regards
Stephen.
Sent from my iPhone
Original Message------
Hi Stephen,
Agreed, that makes perfect sense, but since, as per my current policy, all live-links are monitored, I expected the link alarm to suppress the device down alarm or the other way around.
Best regards,
------------------------------
Marcelo Zacchi
CA Spectrum consultant
Nets Denmark
------------------------------