Need guidance to install iSPI for traffic and QA
I am working with NNMi9.01(patch 5) on windows 2k3 with iSPi for performance metrics.
NNMi is having embedded database.
NNMi is working in HA (High availability) and iSPI for metrics is being installed as add-on on the same system.
In current set up, I am planning to install two more iSPI i.e traffic and QA.
Let me know how to proceed to implement the same.
Which are the things I need to consider before moving further.
Re: Need guidance to install iSPI for traffic and QA
If you're co-hosting NNMi, iSPI Performance for Metrics (NPS), iSPI Performance for QA, and iSPI Performance for Traffic you'll need a very powerful server. In fact you'll probably have a hard time finding anyone who would actually recommend installing all of those components on a single system.
iSPI QA has to be installed on the NNMi server so nothing you can do there.
When you have multiple iSPI's, especially Traffic, the NPS is a resource hog. You should consider moving the NPS to a dedicated server with a RAID 10 disk configuration. SAN has faster I/O but I use local disks and am getting away with it. If you do off-load the NPS make sure your new NPS server is attached to the same switch and is on the same VLAN your NNMi server is connected to. When you implement Traffic you'll notice a large increase in the number files being processed by the NPS, especially if you have multiple leaf collectors, and you want to minimize the amount of time it takes for the NPS processing to complete. You want the NNMi traffic interfaces to display data as close to real-time as possible.
Also, iSPI Traffic has Master and Leaf Collector software components that have to be installed. If you're installing multiple leaf collectors you cannot co-host the master and the leaf so you'll need to install the master and leaf on seperate servers. Whether or not you want multiple leafs depends on how many flows you'll be processing and whether you'll be receiving flows from multiple sites. Do you know how many nodes/ interfaces you're expecting to report to iSPI Traffic? Do you have a lot of traffic on your network? With higher volumes of routed traffic you'll have bigger flow files and more overhead can be expected on the NPS. Do you have multiple sites? If so, how's the bandwith holding up on your WAN links?
If you don't have any plans to implement more than one leaf, you can co-host the master and leaf but I would recommend that you do not install them on the NNMi or NPS servers. Build another server or, if you have an an existing server that's under-utilized, use that. The Master and Leaf components do not support HA in the sense you can have an Active/ Standby Master and Leaf. If your NNMi server fails you'll have all your eggs in one basket and some of them will be left behind.
If you co-host the master and leaf you'll need a minimum of 8 GB RAM just for these two components. The memory requirement can go higher depending on the number of flows you're processing and how you configure the various options assoicated with the Traffic SPI.
So in the end, you would have something like this:
NNMi in HA w/ iSPI QA and iSPI Traffic Extension Pack
NPS on a dedicated server
iSPI Traffic Master Collector and Leaf Collector co-hosted on a server other than the NNMi or NPS servers or,
iSPI Traffic Master Collector and Leaf Collectors on seperate servers if you plan to have more than 1 leaf in your envirnoment. Again, avoid installing these components on the NNMi or NPS servers.
This type of configuration will allow you to scale nicely and helps to avoid compatibility issues and contention between the products. Also, if you choose to go down this path, I recommend upgrading NNMi, NPS, and iSPI's to 9.2. You'll be installing the NPS, iSPI QA, and iSPI Traffic from scratch anyways so why not take the extra time and upgrade the entire envirnoment. I never impelemnted 9.0; we went from 7.5 to 9.1. However, I have seen demos of 9.0 and given my experience with 9.1, 9.2 is a big leap forward in terms of the UI, the features and functionality, and the performance of NNMi, the NPS, and all of the iSPI's mentioned in this thread. It is well worth the time.