| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name
 | Date | Lines | 
|---|
| 1018.1 | Maybe is it obsolete in DECnet? | AZUR::HUREZ | Connectivity & Computing Services @VBE. DTN 828-5159 | Tue Mar 18 1997 08:20 | 50 | 
|  |     
    Looking into the code, the WDM event is reported when DECnet returns
    the condition value SS$_NOSUCHOBJ (documented below).  I couldn't get
    it actually generated indeed, even after stopping the Agent and renaming
    the command file sys$sysdevice:[sns$watchdog]sns$watchdog.com.  It seems
    that DECnet is always returning SS$_REJECT (connect to network object
    rejected) in that case indeed.  I'll try to investigate some more...
    
    Best Regards,
    
    	-- Olivier.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    $ help/message NOSUCHOBJ
    
    [...]
    
     NOSUCHOBJ,  network object is unknown at remote node
    
      Facility:     SYSTEM, System Services
    
      Explanation:  An attempt was made to initiate a DECnet for OpenVMS logical
                    link connection and the target object of the connect could
                    not be found on the specified node. The object name or
                    object number is unknown, or the command file used to start
                    the object could not be found.
    
      User Action:  Notify the system manager of the remote node. Refer to
                    the DECnet for OpenVMS Networking Manual for additional
                    information.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    $ help/message REJECT
    
    [...]
    
     REJECT,  connect to network object rejected
    
      Facility:     SYSTEM, System Services
    
      Explanation:  A request to connect to an object at a remote node
                    failed for one of the following reasons:
                    o The object requested does not exist.
                    o The access control information specified is invalid.
                    o The partner NSP has no resources.
                    o The partner task exited during the connect sequence.
                    o The partner task rejected the connect.
    
      User Action:  Determine which reason caused the failure and try to correct
                    the condition.
    
 | 
| 1018.2 |  | CSC32::BUTTERWORTH | Gun Control is a steady hand. | Tue Mar 18 1997 13:58 | 16 | 
|  |     Ollie,
      I was working on this with Roger and I distinctly remember getting
    the WDM event back in V1.0 days. I thought that the sns$reject_once 
    image that is run by SNS$WATCHDOG.COM should send a certain status code
    back to the consolidator and the consolidator would know that the
    Agent isn't running. The only time SNS$WATCHDOG.COM should run is when
    the agent isn't running due to the way that the SNS$WATCHDOG is
    defined in the permanent object database. Obviously, when the Agent
    starts and declares itself as the SNS$WATCHDOG object SNS$WATCHDOG.COM
    won't get executed. As I said earlier, I remember getting the WDM event 
    back in V1.0. Based on what you said in -1 about the NOSUCHOBJ status
    then it would seem that we'd only get the WDM event if the Agent was not 
    installed on a node we attempt to poll. Hmmmmm....
    
    Regs,
      Dan
 | 
| 1018.3 |  | AZUR::HUREZ | Connectivity & Computing Services @VBE. DTN 828-5159 | Wed Mar 19 1997 05:44 | 9 | 
|  |     
    I tried as well clearing the object definition in NCP, removing the
    SNS$WATCHDOG account, etc... with no chance!  The returned status
    always is connection rejected or refused.
    
    I still have to determine whether this is due to a change in SNS or in
    DECnet...
    
    	-- Olivier.
 | 
| 1018.4 | \ | CSC32::BUTTERWORTH | Gun Control is a steady hand. | Wed Mar 19 1997 12:49 | 7 | 
|  |     Interesting and here's a new wrinkle. I just setup my V2.2-11
    consolidator node to poll a system that has never had Watchdog installed
    so you'd think we'd get a SS$_NOSUCHOBJ right? Wrong! We get 
    "login information invalid at remote node".
    
    Regs,
      Dan
 |