toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

13515 discussions

CIFS shares and auditing
by Geoff Hardin 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Toasters, Let me start by stating that I am a UNIX admin and I administer my filers strictly by command line or scripts we've written. Most of our data is shared via NFS with a few CIFS shares setup on only a couple filers. That said, a user want a log of who accesses his share and which files were viewed/changed. Reading the man pages and the admin guide for ONTAP 6.1, it appears that the best/only solution is the cifs.audit.enable option. I have enabled this per the instructions in the System Administrators Guide (http://now.netapp.com/NOW/knowledge/docs/ontap/rel61r1/html/sag/cifs36.htm#…). According to this document, you can turn auditing on in five simple steps. My problem is with step number 4: "Activate access auditing for individual files and directories according to your Windows documentation." Since I'm a UNIX admin, I don't understand the Windows aspect of filer administration. I tried getting our NT admins to take a look at it, but they say they can't set the file and directory auditing on the filer using the User Manager tool (the menu items under the Policies menu are unselectable). I have tried creating a non-root, administrative account using the useradmin console command, but that left them with fewer rights on the filer than as the domain admin. Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Geoff Hardin geoff.hardin(a)dalsemi.com This space is for rent in order to increase company revenue.

1 0

Weired Linux error
by Premanshu Jain 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

A few RedHat 7.2 nfs clients mounting a F840 volume via automount error out with the following. I have looked into everyting including NIS timeouts, filer sysstat, network performance and everything looks to be fine. Intrestingly all the other non linux Clients accessing the same auto-mount are working perfectly. Mar 9 06:35:12 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK Mar 9 06:35:13 linuxclient last message repeated 52 times Mar 9 06:35:31 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still trying Mar 9 06:35:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK Mar 9 06:35:54 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still trying Mar 9 06:36:34 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK Mar 9 06:36:46 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still trying Mar 9 06:38:36 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 41929 can't get a request slot Mar 9 06:38:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 43328 can't get a request slot

6 7

Re: Snmp traps
by Rune Bakken 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Asbjørn Bjørkelund <asbjorn.bjorkelund(a)proact.no> writes: > Hello Toasters > > We are looking for some help for defining snmp traps, or to be more correct > is there anybody who has already created > lists with traps. i'm looking for 6-7 traps for example for Clusters: this > filer is dead, Clusters: CFO this filer cannot takeover, CFO partner may be > down, > disk failed, power supply failed. Have you checked the files under filer:/etc/mib/ netapp.min traps.dat ?? >>>>>>.rune -- Rune Bakken Senior System Administrator Telenor Business Solutions (Nextra), ManagedServices/*/IP-Services http://ips.telenor.net/

1 0

RE: Weired Linux error
by Touretsky, Gregory 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

What are your mount options? We run NFS over TCP on all our machines, including hundreds of RH7.1 Linux boxes. No data corruption so far (or at least, we hope so ;-) -- Gregory -----Original Message----- From: Tom Felbinger [mailto:tom.felbinger@synopsys.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 4:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: RE: Weired Linux error A couple folks mentioned running NFS over TCP for linux. However, I've encountered data corruption (i.e. running a filer hosted binary will core dump) with RH 7.1 and 7.2 with NFS over TCP. Is there some patch/kernel rev/something I need to apply??? I stopped pursuing this because RedHat and NetApp said this was a known issue. Sounds like some people have it working though. Tom -----Original Message----- From: owner-toasters(a)mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com]On Behalf Of Steve Losen Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 6:04 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Weired Linux error > A few RedHat 7.2 nfs clients mounting a F840 volume via automount error out with > the following. I have looked into everyting including NIS timeouts, filer > sysstat, network performance and everything looks to be fine. Intrestingly all > the other non linux Clients accessing the same auto-mount are working perfectly. > > > Mar 9 06:35:12 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK > Mar 9 06:35:13 linuxclient last message repeated 52 times > Mar 9 06:35:31 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still > trying > Mar 9 06:35:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK > Mar 9 06:35:54 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still > trying > Mar 9 06:36:34 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK > Mar 9 06:36:46 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still > trying > Mar 9 06:38:36 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 41929 can't get a request slot > Mar 9 06:38:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 43328 can't get a request slot Be sure you are mounting with the "tcp" flag. We have found that a Linux NFS v3 client using udp has this problem, but it goes away if you use tcp. I think Linux defaults to udp. You may need to enable tcp on the filer with options nfs.tcp.enable on

1 0

Re: Network Appliance's used equipment policies
by ScottUCE＠aol.com 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Hello, Dan: NetApp's "Used-Equipment Support" policy described at http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html does not support the following claims that are being made by some NetApp reps: 1) "The installation of used NetApp add-ons will void your filer's maintenance service agreement" 2) "If you buy used NetApp add-ons, you will be required to pay NetApp's recertification fee, even if you elect not to place these add-ons under your existing NetApp service contract" 3) "Used NetApp gear can only be purchased from "authorized" NetApp dealers" 4) "3rd party maintenance coverage is not allowed, as it will void your filer's software license agreement" 5) "Allowing hardware or software coverage to lapse will void your filer's software license agreement" We acknowledge that NetApp's standard policy is very clear with regard to "used software." However, NetApp makes exceptions, and as you know, Union Computer has resold many NetApp filers with transferable NFS, CIFS and CLUSTER licenses where Network Appliance actually processes the license transfers, free of charge. Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 email: scott(a)unioncomputer.com phone: 952 935 7282 | fax: 952 935 5056 "Helping our customers make each dollar go further -- since 1991!" www.unioncomputer.com > Subj:RE: Network Appliance's used equipment policies > Date:3/9/2003 8:33:57 PM Central Standard Time > From:<A HREF="mailto:Dan.Warmenhoven@netapp.com">Dan.Warmenhoven(a)netapp.com</A> > To:<A HREF="mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com">ScottUCE(a)aol.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:toasters@mathworks.com">toasters(a)mathworks.com</A> > CC:<A HREF="mailto:scott@unioncomputer.com">scott(a)unioncomputer.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Andy.Kryder@netapp.com">Andy.Kryder(a)netapp.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Steven.Gomo@netapp.com">Steven.Gomo(a)netapp.com</A>, > <A HREF="mailto:mark.santora@netapp.com">mark.santora(a)netapp.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:Valentin.Bercovici@netapp.com">Valentin.Bercovici(a)netapp.com</A> > Sent from the Internet > > > > Scott, > > I must disagree with your claims. Our used equipment policy is clearly > documented, and is not as you stated. I suggest you read it at: > <A HREF="http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html">http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html</A> > > Dan Warmenhoven > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dan Warmenhoven dan(a)netapp.com > Chief Executive Officer phone: 408-822-6600 > Network Appliance, Inc. fax: 408-822-6603 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 2:47 PM > To: toasters(a)mathworks.com > Cc: scott(a)unioncomputer.com > Subject: Network Appliance's used equipment policies > > > An active secondary market is developing for NetApp systems, parts, add-ons > and maintenance. This market is enabling NetApp users to save money on > current products as well as to secure out-of-production features, parts and > add-ons that are no longer available from Network Appliance. > > Unfortunately -- and with increasing frequency -- we are hearing of NetApp > sales reps making false statements about NetApp's used equipment policies. > Examples are: > > > 1) "The installation of used NetApp add-ons will void your filer's > maintenance service agreement" > > 2) "If you buy used NetApp add-ons, you will be required to pay NetApp's > recertification fee, even if you elect not to place these add-ons under > your existing NetApp service contract" > > 3) "Used NetApp gear can only be purchased from "authorized" NetApp > dealers" > > 4) "3rd party maintenance coverage is not allowed, as it will void your > filer's software license agreement" > > 5) "Allowing hardware or software coverage to lapse will void your filer's > software license agreement" > > 6) "NetApp has never negotiated transferable protocol licenses on new filer > purchases." > > > Should you ever be confronted with claims such as these, you might want to > ask your NetApp rep to put them > in writing ;-) > > > Scott Fischmann > Union Computer Exchange, Inc. > 6233 Idylwood Lane > Minneapolis, MN 55436 > email: scott(a)unioncomputer.com > phone: 952 935 7282 | fax: 952 935 5056 > > "Helping our customers make each dollar go further -- since 1991!" > www.unioncomputer.com >

1 0

Snmp traps
by Asbjørn Bjørkelund 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Hello Toasters We are looking for some help for defining snmp traps, or to be more correct is there anybody who has already created lists with traps. i'm looking for 6-7 traps for example for Clusters: this filer is dead, Clusters: CFO this filer cannot takeover, CFO partner may be down, disk failed, power supply failed. Best Regards Asbjorn

1 0

Network Appliance's used equipment policies
by ferdberfl＠netzero.com 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

I'm getting so confused. This statement posted on Network Appliance's web site looks clear to me, especially regarding the transferability of software licenses. I keep reading these postings from Scott at Union Computer exchange and they don't look anything like what Network appliance specifically says in writing here: http://www.netapp.com/support/ues.html this looks kind of specific to me: All Network Appliance software license terms and conditions specify a "license to use," therefore software cannot legally transfer from one owner to another. Anyone purchasing used hardware equipment must also purchase new software licenses directly either from Network Appliance or from an authorized Network Appliance reseller. Software includes all protocols as well as streaming licenses, Snap products, and other software. Anyone trying to sell you "used software" would be violating the terms of the license. Support contracts such as warranty and maintenance agreements are also non-transferable ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: ScottUCE(a)aol.com [mailto:ScottUCE@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 2:47 PM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Cc: scott(a)unioncomputer.com Subject: Network Appliance's used equipment policies An active secondary market is developing for NetApp systems, parts, add-ons and maintenance. This market is enabling NetApp users to save money on current products as well as to secure out-of-production features, parts and add-ons that are no longer available from Network Appliance. Unfortunately -- and with increasing frequency -- we are hearing of NetApp sales reps making false statements about NetApp's used equipment policies. Examples are: 1) "The installation of used NetApp add-ons will void your filer's maintenance service agreement" 2) "If you buy used NetApp add-ons, you will be required to pay NetApp's recertification fee, even if you elect not to place these add-ons under your existing NetApp service contract" 3) "Used NetApp gear can only be purchased from "authorized" NetApp dealers" 4) "3rd party maintenance coverage is not allowed, as it will void your filer's software license agreement" 5) "Allowing hardware or software coverage to lapse will void your filer's software license agreement" 6) "NetApp has never negotiated transferable protocol licenses on new filer purchases." Should you ever be confronted with claims such as these, you might want to ask your NetApp rep to put them in writing ;-) Scott Fischmann Union Computer Exchange, Inc. 6233 Idylwood Lane Minneapolis, MN 55436 email: scott(a)unioncomputer.com phone: 952 935 7282 | fax: 952 935 5056 "Helping our customers make each dollar go further -- since 1991!" www.unioncomputer.com

3 2

Signatures in emails to the list
by kyle 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Please remove them when sending email to the list. They don't hold up in court and it's a eyesore.

2 1

RE: why should app care?
by Alan McLachlan 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

Farid, This is not a simple issue. Here are a couple of possibilities: 1) The application needs to do direct disk I/O (block level). In this case, you're out of luck using a network drive and should look at SnapDrive VLD or FCP. Examples: Microsoft Exchange 2000, some products like some FileNet modules that do block I/O. 2) The application does a check and won't install. However, you may be able to install on local disk then move the location to a network drive later. Example: SAP R/3 on SQL Server. Hope this helps. -----Original Message----- From: Farid Hamjavar [mailto:hamjavar@unm.edu] Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2003 11:24 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: why should app care? NetApp Release 6.3.1 greetings, We have encountered situations where when an application is installed on windows (2000 for example) , the application complains whether or not drive onto which it is installed is a real physical disk or a mounted CIFS share coming from the Netapp filer. If the drive happens to be a mounted CIFS share coming from the Netapp filer application either does not get installed and/or operates erroneously. Anyone encountered this? If so what's the solution or workaround? Thanks, Farid UNM **** ASI Solutions Disclaimer **** The material transmitted may contain confidential and/or privileged material and is intended only for the addressee. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender and destroy any copies of the material immediately. ASI will protect your Privacy according to the 10 Privacy Principles outlined under the new Privacy Act, Dec 2001. This email is also subject to copyright. Any use of or reliance upon this material by persons or entities other than the addressee is prohibited. E-mails may be interfered with, may contain computer viruses or other defects. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any attachments. **** END OF MESSAGE ****

1 0

RE: Weired Linux error
by Hill, Aaron 11 Mar '03

11 Mar '03

I have seen exactly the same nfs: not responding errors on some of my Solaris Servers. I also examined NFS at a very low level and showed no problems. Then I stumbled upon an article in NOW that explained the error to be harmless, more a nuisance than anything else. The performance of servers showing this error vs those not is virtually identical. However,I did not observe this error; Mar 9 06:38:36 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 41929 can't get a request slot Mar 9 06:38:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 43328 can't get a request slot Are you seeing any performance drops? Aaron -----Original Message----- From: Premanshu Jain [mailto:Premanshu.Jain@synopsys.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:26 AM To: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Weired Linux error A few RedHat 7.2 nfs clients mounting a F840 volume via automount error out with the following. I have looked into everyting including NIS timeouts, filer sysstat, network performance and everything looks to be fine. Intrestingly all the other non linux Clients accessing the same auto-mount are working perfectly. Mar 9 06:35:12 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK Mar 9 06:35:13 linuxclient last message repeated 52 times Mar 9 06:35:31 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still trying Mar 9 06:35:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK Mar 9 06:35:54 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still trying Mar 9 06:36:34 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer OK Mar 9 06:36:46 linuxclient kernel: nfs: server filer not responding, still trying Mar 9 06:38:36 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 41929 can't get a request slot Mar 9 06:38:41 linuxclient kernel: nfs: task 43328 can't get a request slot

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