toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

Re: Hardware for F330
by Jay Orr 30 Apr '99

30 Apr '99

Yes, that helps alot! Any idea on adding another scsi card? On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Luke Gain wrote: > Jay, > > I have found that standard Kingston 72pin parity memory works fine in > both my 220 and 330. You should be able to string a 3rd shelf > off of the controller on the motherboard. Don't know where to obtain the > Digital Storageworks shelf (Tech Data used to sell them). > Corprate Systems is normally a good source for drives. (www.corpsys.com) > > Hope this helps. > > -Luke > > > > > > Hi all! > > > > I was wondering if anyone can help. We are a small shop with 2 F330's with > > 2 disk cabinets on each one. We were looking into adding another tray on > > each, but were told by NetApps that they are no longer available. > > > > All I'm looking for is to upgrade the memory, add another scsi controller, > > and another tray (is that asking TOO MUCH???). Questions: Can I use off > > the shelf memory (and what kind)? What about SCSI controllers? Where can I > > get disk trays? Could we instead replace the drives with 9G or 18G drives > > (and what model would we use)? > > > > NetApps solution is to spend $60k+ to upgrade, and all we need is another > > 10G - 20G. The current system works fine, isn't overused, and could handle > > the expansion IF WE CAN FIND THE COMPONENTS... > > > > Thanks for the help. By the by, I've been looking for a toaster FAQ, is > > there one? > > > > ----------- > > Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO > > Jay Orr (314) 579-6517 > > > > > > ----------- Fujitsu - Nexion, St. Louis, MO Jay Orr (314) 579-6517

1 0

Re: netapp meets bugtraq. again.
by Jason D. Kelleher 30 Apr '99

30 Apr '99

In message <Pine.LNX.4.04.9904291507120.12868-100000(a)phaeton.cebaf.gov>, Bry an Hess writes: > >On Thu, 29 Apr 1999 tkaczma(a)gryf.net wrote: >> >> On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Kendall Libby wrote: >> >> > ------- Start of forwarded message (RFC 934 encapsulation) ------- >> > From: pashdown(a)XMISSION.COM (Pete Ashdown) >> > >> > /vol/vol0 -root=adminhost >> > >> > This is all fine and good, but it also exports to the WORLD with root >> > privileges. >> >> Are you sure it exports to all with root priviledges or does it just >> export to all read/write but as root only to adminhost? > > >It doesn't export root privs to all, but just exporting read/write to all >machines is scary enough. If I am a malicious user, I can find the mount >points easily enough, mount the filesystems, and create user accounts on >my machine to match any uid on the filer. After that, who needs root privs >except for files owner by uid 0? > >--Bryan This is not a "netapp meets bugtraq" issue. It's an "every NFS server configured by someone who doesn't know what he's doing meets bugtraq" issue. Security is dependent on the competence of the administrator. Of course, here in the USA, no one is responsible for their own actions. So we should report Linux, SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Free BSD, NetBSD, etc... to bugtraq right away!!! And we'll all sue too!!! Ooops, got way too sarcastic at the end there... jason

2 1

Re: Unable to log onto NetApp machine
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 30 Apr '99

30 Apr '99

On 04/29/99 15:39:16 you wrote: >Hmm, this is what I thought of at first, but when I tried it in the lab, >it did not work. I did get it to work (sort of) bye doing #rsh filer >rc_toggle_basic; passwd . You should not use rsh to rc_toggle_basic to get at commands that are normally not accessible via rsh. There are reasons why they aren't rsh-able. Bruce

1 0

RE: How to use CIFS if PDC not on same lan?
by Muhlestein, Mark 30 Apr '99

30 Apr '99

NT requires you to see the PDC in certain cases, because the BDCs are basically read-only replicas of the PDC. One of those cases is setting the machine password, which is done when the server (NT or filer) is installed, then once a week (Sunday morning at 2 or so). You will have to make the PDC visible at least temporarily to install the filer. After that, it will keep pestering you because it won't be able to do the periodic machine account password update. This is really an issue with NT networking. You would have the same problem trying to install an NT member server in the same situation. There are probably some reasonable ways around this problem; your situation is not that unusual. The details depend on what you are trying to accomplish. You should probably work with customer support to see what makes most sense. You will also probably want 5.3, since it preferentially connects to domain controllers based on the IP address, which would mean it would always use the local BDC except for changing the passwords. By the way, you'll find that if your Windows clients cannot see the PDC they will not be able to change their login passwords from their workstations for the same reason: they have to be able to contact the PDC to do that. Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: Jaye Mathisen [mailto:mrcpu@internetcds.com] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 1999 1:20 PM To: Puneet Anand Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: How to use CIFS if PDC not on same lan? The PDC is not IP reachable from the filer. The filer is on a private backbone, serving NFS/CIFS clients off secondary ethernet interfaces. The BDC happens to be one of those clients. And it has 2 interfaces... On Thu, 29 Apr 1999, Puneet Anand wrote: > Is the PDC registering with the same WINS ? Hopefully yes. > We do need PDC for installation.If this is ONTAP 5.1 or later ,you can > run cifs testdc command with the following options to troubleshoot. > > cifs testdc <wins_ip> <domain_name> <filer_name> > > > -Puneet > __________________ > > > Jaye Mathisen wrote: > > > > I have 2 sites. Site B has a BDC for a domain, and the Netapp. > > Site A connected via T1 has the PDC. > > > > When I try to run CIFS setup, it gets to the part about needing to reach > > the PDC and can't find it, so it aborts. > > > > I'm not sure why it can't just do whatever it needs to do with the BDC > > right there (running WINS)... > > > > Perhaps I need to add some key to WINS for the netapp to see it? >

1 0

Procom Netforce
by Kevin W. Brown 30 Apr '99

30 Apr '99

I just got back from ISPCon, where I saw the Procom Netforce filer, and I was wondering if anyone here has experience with this product. Specifically, they have a 100G fault-tolerant version for around $30K. It has two host "controllers", which are basically Pentium II/III machines that load balance and automatically fail over. It has a journaling file system and snapshot backup capability. We are looking to purchase some new network attached (NFS) storage, and this looks like it just might fit the bill. Thganks! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin W. Brown | 4080 Water Tank Rd. | E-Mail: kevin(a)qis.net Quantum Internet Services | Manchester, MD 21102 | Voice: 410-239-6920 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: How to use CIFS if PDC not on same lan?
by Sam Schorr 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

The fun question is, what if there is no domain controller available due exactly to the configuration Jaye is trying to install - a separate, "back channel" subnet that is not part of the domain. How would the filers use CIFS then? Install as workstation and do authentication with every file request off a local pwd file? -----Original Message----- From: Jaye Mathisen [mailto:mrcpu@internetcds.com] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 1999 1:20 PM To: Puneet Anand Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: How to use CIFS if PDC not on same lan? The PDC is not IP reachable from the filer. The filer is on a private backbone, serving NFS/CIFS clients off secondary ethernet interfaces. The BDC happens to be one of those clients. And it has 2 interfaces... On Thu, 29 Apr 1999, Puneet Anand wrote: > Is the PDC registering with the same WINS ? Hopefully yes. > We do need PDC for installation.If this is ONTAP 5.1 or later ,you can > run cifs testdc command with the following options to troubleshoot. > > cifs testdc <wins_ip> <domain_name> <filer_name> > > > -Puneet > __________________ > > > Jaye Mathisen wrote: > > > > I have 2 sites. Site B has a BDC for a domain, and the Netapp. > > Site A connected via T1 has the PDC. > > > > When I try to run CIFS setup, it gets to the part about needing to reach > > the PDC and can't find it, so it aborts. > > > > I'm not sure why it can't just do whatever it needs to do with the BDC > > right there (running WINS)... > > > > Perhaps I need to add some key to WINS for the netapp to see it? >

1 0

The great online RMA experiment
by Graham C. Knight 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

I had a few failed disks hanging around that I needed to get RMA's for. So I decided to experiment and use the online RMA feautre on the NOW page: http://now.netapp.com/products/rma/rma.shtml Within 5 minutes of submitting 2 RMA's I had an email with the RMA number in my box. I'd call the experiment a great success! :-) Very impressive. Graham

1 0

How to use CIFS if PDC not on same lan?
by Jaye Mathisen 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

I have 2 sites. Site B has a BDC for a domain, and the Netapp. Site A connected via T1 has the PDC. When I try to run CIFS setup, it gets to the part about needing to reach the PDC and can't find it, so it aborts. I'm not sure why it can't just do whatever it needs to do with the BDC right there (running WINS)... Perhaps I need to add some key to WINS for the netapp to see it?

2 2

RE: SNMP traps (+ other monitoring issues)
by Richard Moore 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

Keith, We have currently set up to trap on 'miscGlobalStatus' as it seemed a reasonable starter - The MIB description is a little woolly however : "This indicates the overall status of the appliance. The algorithm to determine the value uses both hardware status (e.g. the number of failed fans) and volume status (e.g. number of volumes that are full). This may change...etc" This has values of other(1) unknown(2) ok(3) nonCritical(4) critical(5) nonRecoverable(6) Is there a more detailed explanation of what event will trigger what status ? We are considering configuring our notification system to respond according to the value; i.e. email/phone on (4), 24hr page(5), print CV(6). On testing, when we switch off 1 power supply out of 2, we get a 'critical'(5) trap. ( is 'nonCritical' more appropriate ?) Other traps to possibly have set up as a 'starter' set : OverTemperature, FailedFanCount, FailedPowerSupplyCount, dfPerCentKBytesCapacity. Other monitoring issues : We have configured syslog.conf to send message errors to 'messages.err', critical to 'messages.crit' etc. hoping to be able to parse these files to enable an appropriate response according to severity. However, when doing the same power supply pull, we only get a message in the 'info' file. (This is deemed of sufficient importance however to trigger autosupport email.) So it appears we have to match on the message wording itself - an incremental approach of matching on all known potential error messages - time consuming. In lieu of better classification of messages, has anybody got a list of known filer error messages, with severity level ? How do other users monitor filers ? Regards, Richard Moore NortelNetworks Harlow UK

2 1

temperature inside filer
by Jason Middlebrooks 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

Are there any commands to monitor the temperature inside the filer or to get information from the temperatures sensors? Thanks In advance.

1 0

DNS problems
by Mohler, Jeff 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

Anyone else figure out the heck to resolve this? 08:56:23 CDT [ratbert: rshd_0]: DNS server for domain "wcg.net" not responding : Connection timed out. MY blinkin DNS servers are working just fine...all of 30,000 miles of fiber hardware, routers, and customers have no problems with it either. Why only the NetApp, and a reboot isnt an option.

5 6

Re: netapp meets bugtraq. again.
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 29 Apr '99

29 Apr '99

On 04/28/99 22:06:43 you wrote: >Ok, so I don't have the docs handy.. but if you have an "-access" >options, it just seems kinda intuitive to me that you might actually >*USE IT*. But maybe it's just me. No bug here... that's the way all NFS servers work. It is a little non-intuitive but once you know what you're doing there is no problem. Changing it for Netapp would create another kind of security bug where simply copying what you used on one server wouldn't work on another despite expectations. The problem lies in the documentation, for not explaining this more clearly. The example isn't meant to be taken literally as something all filer admins should do and thus would be appropriate for their environment. It's meant to be an example. Elsewhere the docs do explain the security implications of various options, but it should probably mention it specifically in the section Pete read, to prevent other people overreacting like Pete did and screaming to bugtraq that the sky is falling. Bruce >------- Start of forwarded message (RFC 934 encapsulation) ------- >From: pashdown(a)XMISSION.COM (Pete Ashdown) >Subject: Network Appliance NFS filer root hole >Date: 28 Apr 1999 15:58:45 -0400 >Organization: Bugtraq List >Message-ID: <199904281658.KAA14944(a)slack.xmission.com> >Reply-To: Pete Ashdown <pashdown(a)XMISSION.COM> > >For Network Appliance NFS filer release: > NetApp Release 5.2.1: Thu Dec 31 12:56:45 PST 1998 > >Following "Example 1" on page 136 of the "System Administrator's Guide" for >the Network Appliance results in a gaping hole. In this example, they >explain that "the following line exports the root directory of the default >filter volume to the administration host with root privileges." > > /vol/vol0 -root=adminhost > >This is all fine and good, but it also exports to the WORLD with root >privileges. You have to specify either "-access", or "-rw", or "-ro" in >addition to "-root" for this not to happen. When I mentioned this to my >NetApp SE, I was met with quizzical looks, but no code-update or patch. >Thusly, I sent it to bugtraq. >------- End -------

1 0

Re: SNMP traps
by Keith Brown 28 Apr '99

28 Apr '99

>Seems like the only built-in traps are "linkUp", "linkDown", "coldStart" and >"authenticationFailure", others you have to add manually which would take >_awhile_ to do. Right. The new SNMP trap machinery provided in Data ONTAP 5.3 is very flexible and extremely powerful. As you have probably seen in the documentation, it actually enables you to set a variety of different types of trap on any supported MIB variable you like. You can monitor variables for crossing administrator defined thresholds in either direction (rising above or falling below). You can monitor variables for staying within administrator defined ranges, or even *outside* of ranges if that makes sense for a particular value. You can keep traps firing when variables stay on the wrong side of "lines" (with a backoff cabability). It's thoroughly wicked. However, one of the last little things that unfortunately didn't get implemented in time for the 5.3 release was the "spoon feed some nice traps on a silver platter" component. :-) As you have discovered, you currently have to look at the filer MIB(s) yourself, figure out what variables you are interested in monitoring in your environment, and then put the relevant traps on them "by hand". Sophisticated administrators will probably *always* want to go through such a procedure, but it is not unreasonable to want to be supplied some "starter traps" on the kinds of events that are likely to be interesting to the majority. We do supply a small handful (which you note above), but there's obviously more we could do here, such as: >I am interested in things like: failed disks, stopped fans, cluster status >etc. Yep. In fact, we are always actively seeking input on the kinds of default traps our customers would like to have supplied "out of the box". Any input posted either here or to my inbox will be seen by the folk who can turn the requests into reality. >http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel53/html/sag/net2.htm says >there should be a "traps.dat" file in "the same directory as the MIB" >(=/etc/mib??) but I am unable to locate this file. I'll see if I can find out what happened to it for you. :-) Keith

1 0

SNMP traps
by Erik Stjerna 28 Apr '99

28 Apr '99

Has anyone set up trap definitions for monitoring a filer? Seems like the only built-in traps are "linkUp", "linkDown", "coldStart" and "authenticationFailure", others you have to add manually which would take _awhile_ to do. I am interested in things like: failed disks, stopped fans, cluster status etc. Would be really handy if someone already has done this and is willing to share that info. http://now.netapp.com/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel53/html/sag/net2.htm says there should be a "traps.dat" file in "the same directory as the MIB" (=/etc/mib??) but I am unable to locate this file. Thanks in advance, Erik Stjerna

1 0

please add me to distribution/reflector list
by Horgan, Patrick 28 Apr '99

28 Apr '99

Please add me to distribution/reflector list. horgan_patrick @emc.com Thank you. ~Patrick ____________________________________ EMC2 Patrick A. Horgan Product Manager - Celerra File Server e-mail: horgan_patrick(a)emc.com <mailto:horgan_patrick@isus.emc.com> phone: 508-435-2075 x75672 fax: 508-435-8903 ____________________________________

1 0

EMC email list (was RE: remote support issues)
by Adams, Christian 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

G D Geen, Please find the following email to identify the EMC email list/archive as you requested. /Christian Adams System Engineer EMC >Resent-From: emc-request(a)interex.org >Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:51:32 -0800 (PST) >X-Sender: bill(a)proaxis.com >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) >Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:48:19 -0800 >To: emc(a)interex.org, haforum(a)interex.org >From: Bill Lancaster <bill(a)proaxis.com> >X-Mailing-List: <emc(a)interex.org> archive/latest/2 >X-Loop: emc(a)interex.org >Resent-Sender: emc-request(a)interex.org >Subject: [EMC:2] Welcome! > >Hello and welcome to all who have joined the EMC list! The list was just >created this week and now has 127 people signed up! Clearly, you all have >an interested in seeing a public forum for users of EMC equipment. > >The genesis of this list came through meetings held between the Interex >High Availability Forum members and various EMC staff at EMC headquarters >in December. (There is also a listserver specializing in HP-related High >Availability issues, including EMC issues). The High Availability Forum >Executive Committee members are: > > Myself (Bill Lancaster), co-chair > Chuck Ciesinski, co-chair > Isaac Blake > Steve Guzzi > Chris Rink > Gary Maness > Wesley Sawyer > Deb Lawson (Interex liaison) > >Bob Yach is chairing the EMC SIG. > >I'd like to start the ball rolling by asking all of you what your >discussion interests are for this list. Do you have any pressing concerns >that you would like to throw open for discussion? I understand that >several EMC personnel are participating in this list so you should stand a >good chance getting answers to issues/questions. What kind of EMC >equipment are you using? How has it added to your high availability? > >Jump on in! > > >Bill Lancaster >bill(a)proaxis.com > -----Original Message----- > From: G D Geen [SMTP:geen@msp.sc.ti.com] > Sent: Friday, April 23, 1999 7:02 AM > To: rhodesr(a)firstenergycorp.com > Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Subject: Re: remote support issues > > If you have problems with support, bring it to the attention > of your Sales Advisor. NetApp is very good about communicating > internally the issues of their customers. Also some very heavy > hitters at NetApp read this mail list. So use this forum to > address your concerns. Please note, NetApp is not the only > provider of network filers out there. If you are not happy, > ask Auspex why they don't have a mail list like this. I did and > was surprised by the answer. I have not asked EMC about a mail > list yet, but I am interested in hearing the answer. >

1 0

RE: Digital UNIX clients -- no non-root access
by Davis, John 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

I have a site here(CFO 5.2.1P2-F740) attached to a DEC running 4.0E via GigE that is using NFS & CIFS; save installing some DEC patches for their GigE card the system has been running fine.. -----Original Message----- From: Muhlestein, Mark [mailto:mark.muhlestein@netapp.com] Sent: Monday, April 26, 1999 7:49 PM To: 'sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com'; jgaski(a)WPI.EDU; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Digital UNIX clients -- no non-root access I'm not sure what your problem is, but I can verify that internally here at NetApp we use DU 4.0D (rev 878) extensively on several Alpha machines against multiple filers with no issues. We have also run with 4.0E. What version of the filer software are you running? Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com -----Original Message----- From: sirbruce(a)ix.netcom.com [mailto:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Monday, April 26, 1999 6:39 PM To: jgaski(a)WPI.EDU; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Digital UNIX clients -- no non-root access On 04/26/99 21:11:27 you wrote: >I have an open call with Network Appliance, but they have said that >there must be something strange in Compaq's implementation of the NFS >client. The same error occurs on Digital UNIX 4.0D pl3, 4.0E pl1, and >5.0 beta. It occurs whether the mount is soft or hard, udp or tcp, >nfsv3 or nfsv2. > >It seems like such a large, ubiquitous error that I can't believe >noone would have seen it before. I thought that Digital UNIX support >was standard, and I can't imagine how all of our Alpha clients could >be non-standard in such a way. You'd be surprised. Lots of vendors have little quirks in their implementation that, while they happen to work okay with one server, are really out of spec and may not work with another. However, I know that Digital Unix *used* to work, but the last I ever saw personally work was 4.0C. So either they've changed something, or something in the new Netapp release fixed/broke something. Bruce

1 0

Re: Early Access Releases
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

On 04/26/99 17:11:16 you wrote: > So who tested cluster takeover/giveback during the "comprehensive > development and release procedure"...? Can they tell me what I'm > doing wrong? Was bug 14194 (Filer crashes during boot during > partner giveback) discovered during this testing and 5.3 was > released anyway? If so, I think you guys are carrying that MS > partnership a bit too far... > > Ok, maybe comparing you guys to MS was below the belt. I'll take > that back. But I'm still curious how 5.3 made it as far as it did? > I thought clustering was the hot new thing at NetApp. > > Did somebody decide a boot during giveback was ok for now? It's > not a problem until the partner s fixed or until your testing to > see that you got what you paid for. If this was the case, a "known > bugs list" would've been nice. I believe Netapp has said before publically that they do find bugs during testing that they don't fix by release time. This is not to say that they don't fix any, but that little bugs or big bugs that only appear under relatively rare circumstances won't be addressed until a later release. I've suggested before that Netapp publically reveal bugs that have only been discovered internally at Netapp, but I think their current policy is only to reveal bugs online that customers have encountered themselves. So it is possible they discovered the bug in advance and didn't think anyone (or perhaps very few) would encounter it. Or perhaps they didn't. They do have pretty big testing procedures for new software releases but I don't think they regression test every possible scenario. Bruce

2 1

Re: Digital UNIX clients -- no non-root access
by sirbruce＠ix.netcom.com 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

On 04/26/99 21:11:27 you wrote: >I have an open call with Network Appliance, but they have said that >there must be something strange in Compaq's implementation of the NFS >client. The same error occurs on Digital UNIX 4.0D pl3, 4.0E pl1, and >5.0 beta. It occurs whether the mount is soft or hard, udp or tcp, >nfsv3 or nfsv2. > >It seems like such a large, ubiquitous error that I can't believe >noone would have seen it before. I thought that Digital UNIX support >was standard, and I can't imagine how all of our Alpha clients could >be non-standard in such a way. You'd be surprised. Lots of vendors have little quirks in their implementation that, while they happen to work okay with one server, are really out of spec and may not work with another. However, I know that Digital Unix *used* to work, but the last I ever saw personally work was 4.0C. So either they've changed something, or something in the new Netapp release fixed/broke something. Bruce

1 0

Digital UNIX clients -- no non-root access
by Joanna Gaski 27 Apr '99

27 Apr '99

We have recently obtained an F740. I have a problem when I attempt to export a shared area from the filer to any of our Digital UNIX clients. The problem is that on the alpha client, root can read and access files as normal, but if a normal user does even something as simple as a ls -lt /mnt an error message is produced: NFS3 RFS3_ACCESS failed for server toaster : RPC: Server can't decode arguments /mnt: I/O error The exports file has the share exported with -ro,access=hostname,root=hostname where hostname is a FQDN. I have an open call with Network Appliance, but they have said that there must be something strange in Compaq's implementation of the NFS client. The same error occurs on Digital UNIX 4.0D pl3, 4.0E pl1, and 5.0 beta. It occurs whether the mount is soft or hard, udp or tcp, nfsv3 or nfsv2. It seems like such a large, ubiquitous error that I can't believe noone would have seen it before. I thought that Digital UNIX support was standard, and I can't imagine how all of our Alpha clients could be non-standard in such a way. Any help or pointers are appreciated. Thanks. (BTW, I haven't yet dealt with the fact that when exporting from the filer to one of our ULTRIX boxes, a simple "ls -lt /mnt" by a non-root user results in the mount point changing to these permissions, and the share essentially disappearing. ---------- 0 root 0 Dec 31 1969 /mnt I'll get to that eyesore later.)

1 0

RE: Early Access Releases
by Melvin, Grant 26 Apr '99

26 Apr '99

Hi, The NDMP bug in Data ONTAP 5.3 affects BudTool users who are backing up to a tape drive local to the BudTool host. This is logged as defect BT 9476 at Legato (IntelliGuard) & NA 13442 at NetApp. The following BudTool certification page explains this: http://www.iguard.com/products/certmatrix.html This is resolved in 5.3D2. Sorry it affected your installation Jason. Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: mgx(a)spruce.lsd.ornl.gov [mailto:mgx@spruce.lsd.ornl.gov] Sent: Monday, April 26, 1999 3:44 PM To: Shaun T. Erickson Cc: Jason D. Kelleher; toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Early Access Releases oh no, now i'm starting to worry. i was told to go to 5.3 last thursday, i told the engineer that i was backing up two filers via NDMP he said no problem, go with 5.3. my first scheduled backup since upgrading is tonight. -- michael On Mon, Apr 26, Shaun T. Erickson wrote: > > I'm not confident they *have* an official stance. I opened a case on > Friday and was told I should upgrade to 5.3. I opened another case on > Saturday, and during the conversation mentioned I was told to go to 5.3. > This person said I shouldn't do that and that no one should have told me > to do so. > > How in the heck are we, as customers, supposed to believe anything they > say, if they can't even agree amongst themselves? > > -ste

1 0

Early Access Releases
by Jason D. Kelleher 26 Apr '99

26 Apr '99

Anyone know what NetApp's "official" stance is on Early Access Releases? Are they beta tested in the field before becomming Early Access? Is anyone who installs an Early Access Release a beta tester? Does NetApp beta test? Has anyone out there installed 5.3, 5.3D2 (fixes NDMP problems), or 5.3D7 (supposed to fix crash during giveback) on an F740 cluster and successfully done a takeover/giveback without at least one extra reboot (the system doing the giveback) and a core file? If so, were you using second level VIFs? If you were using second level VIFs, and it actually worked, did your messages file list network errors after takover that NetApp said were ok? I've been working with tech support for over a week now on these issues and my managers just turned up the heat on me. I'm hoping someone has an "it all worked after I did..." story. any help appreciated, jason

4 3

Undocumented commands
by Shaw, Kevin 26 Apr '99

26 Apr '99

Has anyone compiled a list of OnTap undocumented commands? If so, can I get a copy? Thanks in advance.

1 0

Re: Early Access Releases
by Jason D. Kelleher 26 Apr '99

26 Apr '99

In message <199904262120.RAA12822(a)trail.cimedia.com>, Ozzie Sabina writes: > >+-- "Jason D. Kelleher" <kelleher(a)susq.com> once said: >| Let me guess. You had it installed on a single filer and didn't >| use NDMP to back it up to a remote media server, right? I had >| problems with these immediately after installation of 5.3. > >We had it on two filers, and we primarily tested the Snap Mirror, >Secure Admin, Snap Restore, and the ntp support. Unfortunately we >don't use NDMP, so we didn't test that. Primarily, the beta group >tested what they were interested in testing, and I believe NetApp >looked for people who were interested in testing different things. Sorry, by "single" I meant non-cluster. The SNTP support is great (although why it comes up before the network interfaces is confusing). And support for VIF failover was the main reason I went to 5.3 -- very nifty. jason

1 0

Re: Early Access Releases
by Jason D. Kelleher 26 Apr '99

26 Apr '99

In message <3724D487.E0D244DF(a)research.bell-labs.com>, "Shaun T. Erickson" w rites: >"Jason D. Kelleher" wrote: >> >> Anyone know what NetApp's "official" stance is on Early Access >> Releases? > >I'm not confident they *have* an official stance. I opened a case on >Friday and was told I should upgrade to 5.3. I opened another case on >Saturday, and during the conversation mentioned I was told to go to 5.3. >This person said I shouldn't do that and that no one should have told me >to do so. > >How in the heck are we, as customers, supposed to believe anything they >say, if they can't even agree amongst themselves? Until NetApp slows down the pace of their releases, I think getting bug lists for each OS release is critical. At least then you can go over the list and decide whether or not upgrading will cause you more or less trouble. jason

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters