OpenText Network Node Manager i Reviews

It gives us a good overview of what's happening in our networks and the devices in the networks. And it allows us to act very quickly when some problem is detected.

When some metric device has some issue, for example there is some server connected that hosts some application, and that application might be a web portal or internet banking customer we are providing services for, when this device is down service is not available to the customers of our customers.

As the technologies evolve, also these solutions or the monitoring tools should evolve to cover the progress in technology, including capabilities related to monitoring of virtualized devices today, as the DNS is on the table in this way.

I have been working with it for nine years.

In my experience it's very stable. We haven’t had any problems so far, such as unexpected breaks or a server going down. So, in this sense, I would say that it is very, very stable.

Scalability is actually one of the reasons why we picked Node Manager. With one instance you can monitor from a couple of hundreds up to several thousands of devices. So it's very good.

We have Premier support from HPE. We are very, very satisfied with support because we have one dedicated resource in support, so he knows our environment. Every time we have some minor issue we don't need to explain what version of the software are we running, how our environment looks like and so on, because he knows this already.

When I started to work for the company, it was already implemented. But nine years ago when we started, we had 3 Network Node Manager servers and right now we have 19. So, over time, I have definitely been involved in implementing the solution. It is very very straightforward. You just deploy the installation package; it's not an issue.

We evaluate other solutions on do it in regular basis. Basically, we check the markets to see what’s there. We have HPE now and we use test cases to check the market; is any new solution available and, based on those test cases, HPE wins or HPE does not. So far it's winning.

Last year we evaluated SevOne. It wasn't so bad and it provided similar features like Network Node Manager. But that additional value was not high enough. So we are eager to implement it because implementation is a big job and it can take month to do. If we saw that it was really, in some way, much better than Network Node Manager and it was worthy to implement it, we would have done so.

The main feature we find the most useful for us is that it makes a map of the topology of the network.

Because of the topological network mapping, our management can quickly take action when there's a network problem.

It needs better management for the routing protocol, which right now is really not very good. While it does allow us to come in and quickly manage faults in the network, there are issues with the connection and packages between the physical and software layers of the router.

There are no issues when we deploy it.

We have no issues with stability. It's quite stable, in fact.

We have a large enterprise and a large network. We've had no problems regarding scalability.

We've had to contact them as sometimes we find bugs in the software. They're a little slow, but they're OK.

We've worked with CA and IBM, and they're still part of our architecture.

Our NOC is heavily using and dependent on the product for quick action and troubleshooting network issues.

Most valuable function would have to the internal causal engine and its root cause analyzer which keep us updated on critical errors and incidents in our network environment. Secondly, the multi-vendor capability (we have approx 150 different device types from some 10 vendors).

Reporting. Even though this is available in separate software (iSPI) there is potential in making the reporting more SLA-aware and more intuitive.

My organization has been using it since v6.x, but I was not involved until v8.x in 2008.

No.

No.

First line of support can be time consuming to collaborate with. Sadly, this got worse when HPE outsourced their support. When cases are elevated, the support and problem solving is usually sped up and excellently handled and resolved.

No.

Easy install, but configuration of various aspects demands continuous focus and knowledge of the product.

No, it was already chosen when I started at my current employer.

Initially, keeping the default settings is wise. Get familiar with and become knowledgeable in the product before getting into advanced tweaking.

We mainly use it for monitoring notes, and if you've got outages and stuff like that.

So actually it makes our life a lot easier in identifying if you've got problematic areas.

That is a little bit difficult for me because I haven't been personally dealing with the software directly, so the subcontractor has been the face in informing us what the product is capable of. Hence we came to the sessions now in order for us to have first-hand information on what all these products are capable of.

I've been using it, let's say for four years.

So far it has been stable for us, although we might be using an old product. So we haven't really been upgrading and getting to the latest and greatest versions.

I can't really comment about scalability. Our company is a little bit stable, in the sense that the company hasn't grown much. We don't necessarily have too much control over what we can do because most things are regulated from outside the company. So getting to do new things is a little bit of a challenge for us.

We fortunately work with a subcontractor that is dealing with HP. So there's a middle-man to talk to in case we run into problems.

I wouldn't say I know about the setup because most of the work was done by the subcontractors.

We base our decision of vendor really around the support issue. It's really about stability of the product you have, and your escalation levels should also be playing a role, because if you run into problems, you need to know who your friend is.

The most important benefit is to have one controller and to get all information to a single point. This is easier than looking at different points to see where messages and tickets are coming from.

It makes our work easier.

I think the technical support should be improved.

There is not a lot of downtime. It's OK.

We have had no problems with scalability for our infrastructure and our dimensions.

Sometimes technical support is not so amazing. We need to wait a long time to get a solution for a ticket. And often they repeat the same questions. You open the ticket, and you get questions back that you already answered in the ticket. So it's often a long wait and not so easy to get the right people. Offices tend to get inferior support.

I was not involved in the initial setup. We have used HPE software since about 1995. Sometimes it has been good, but at times it was very terrible. In the last year or so, there has been improvement and I think it's come a long way, but it’s not on the mark yet.

I think you should take a look at it. If it fits your needs, then it's OK. But it's not the only solution. There are other alternatives.

When choosing a vendor, the solution has to be a benefit to our companies. It must be a complete package. The best software turns out to be not the best thing if technical support is not good or there are other issues; then go with something else.

The GUI and config manager.

The network Manager has improved incident tracking and speed of response to trouble tickets.

A year plus.

Configuration was a bit cumbersome for snmp traps on the routers and configuration of the SPIs was a little complicated.

None that I noticed.

Solarwinds was what was used by the organisation but the management decided on a unified solution IT and Telco.

It seemed a bit complex in some areas.

A vendor did the implementation and they were very experienced and responsive to issues.

I'd say about 0.3 for now as we really haven't used it for that long yet.

The solution is part of the HP NMS solution and the unification helps in keeping a flow of processes going in the organisation.

Multi-vendor equipment support Root cause analysis Multi-type and rich reports

Need a good estimation of the network (manly nodes) otherwise, the system will not work correctly. Many issues can be found during deployment due to the use of many components and features by the product.

Sizing should be estimated before deployment

A complete solution for network monitoring. The cost is high comparing to its competitors, but the results are awesome.