<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Stacked switches in rack view]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Greetings all,<br />
I am evaluating NetXMS for use in our environment and I have a question about how to best represent stacked switches in the rack function. Since they only show up as one node, it's challenging for us. It's not uncommon for us to have switch stacks spread out across multiple racks as well - usually in the same room, but sometimes not. What is the best way to represent this? We use Juniper (EX), Aruba (2930f, 3810m), and Cisco (moving to Cat 9series) mostly - but we could inherit all sorts of things.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netxms.org/topic/6017/stacked-switches-in-rack-view</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2026 09:23:09 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.netxms.org/topic/6017.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:52:41 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Stacked switches in rack view on Mon, 02 Oct 2023 13:41:11 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hi,</p>
<p dir="auto">We had a discussion with developers and formulated how this could be implemented somewhere in the future: <a href="https://track.radensolutions.com/issue/NX-2466" rel="nofollow ugc">https://track.radensolutions.com/issue/NX-2466</a></p>
<p dir="auto">For the time being, you can create dummy nodes (specifying ip address 0.0.0.0), create one script DCI on each of these nodes with "Use this DCI for node status calculation" and use script to determine status (script should be returning 0...4 for Normal...Critical)</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netxms.org/post/32862</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netxms.org/post/32862</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Filipp Sudanov]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 02 Oct 2023 13:41:11 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Stacked switches in rack view on Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:19:21 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hi,</p>
<p dir="auto">I'm facing the same issue. Is there any news on this, or is it still the best recommendation?</p>
<p dir="auto">Cheers,<br />
Frank</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netxms.org/post/32680</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netxms.org/post/32680</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[2b2bff]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:19:21 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Stacked switches in rack view on Sun, 07 Jul 2019 11:35:07 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hi,</p>
<p dir="auto">one possible option is to create fake nodes without IP address to represent different units and use status DCIs to set unit status. I will also think about implementing some sort of built-in mechanism for representing units of distributed stack as that seems to be quite common task. If you wish you can follow on this ticket: <a href="https://track.radensolutions.com/issue/NX-1657" rel="nofollow ugc">https://track.radensolutions.com/issue/NX-1657</a></p>
<p dir="auto">Best regards,<br />
Victor</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netxms.org/post/26084</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netxms.org/post/26084</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[victor]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 07 Jul 2019 11:35:07 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>