Cloud Management and AIOps
This is an IBM Automation portal for Cloud Management, Technology Cost Management, Network Automation and AIOps products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
Hi Narendra,
Could I ask what is driving the requirement to add both the Primary and Secondary devices with the same IP i.e. their shared VIP?
My understanding is that Prisma HA operates in an Active-Standby configuration, but both the Primary and Secondary devices are able to respond to SNMP, which means they can be monitored simultaneously. With that in mind, there are a few considerations regarding the approach you're proposing:
Both devices would present the same IP addresses through the VIP, which means the monitoring platform would effectively be monitoring the same device through two separate instances. This will lead to:
Duplicate monitoring of the same objects and resources.
Duplicate alerts being generated for the same monitored components.
In the event of a failover from the Primary to the Secondary device:
A "Device Down" alert would likely not be generated, as the VIP would remain reachable and both devices would continue responding to SNMP.
Since the SNMP indexes on the two devices may not be identical, there is a possibility of inconsistencies appearing in monitoring data, including alerts for missing or unavailable objects. This could also increase the volume of alerts generated during or after a failover event.
If the Primary and Secondary devices are monitored using their individual management IP addresses, both devices can be monitored independently while still providing visibility into each device's status.
Based on the above, this isn't something we would currently be able to support through the core product functionality.
That said, I'd be keen to better understand the underlying use case and why monitoring through the VIP is important for Raymond James. Understanding the specific requirement may help us identify an alternative approach that achieves the desired outcome while avoiding some of the challenges outlined above.
I am going to close this Idea request as from our last discussion, this is not required anymore as you are using unique IP's for each of the HA pair devices - and that is perfectly well suited to how you can ensure both the devices are monitored at all times and will have alerts when either of them go down or have issues.
Best Regards,
Kaushal