netscan progress indicator

Tom I agree with you 100%. I hope to see changes in the visibility of a netscan. Its a great feature but you have no idea how far along you are or the errors that were encountered along the way. I would add to this and say the following:rn rn1. The netscan seems to happen in stages. nsplist, nspdetails, etc etc. State the current stage, its progress, and possibly a time indicator until the next stage occurs. Currently the debug commands used to acquire some of this information display inaccurate data and give no progress indicator.rn2. Results page. How did the scan go? Which devices failed to respond to my snmp string? Which IPs responded to ping but not WMI? How long did the scan take?rn3. Similar page or progress indicator for Active discovery. Once the netscan is done you have your hosts in a group and now active discovery takes over and starts scanning the hosts to determine which polls to load on that host. Right now repeatedly refreshing the page or running debug commands are the only ways to see progress. But these methods give you no progress indicator showing how much time has passed, how much time is left or any errors that occurred during the discovery. rn4. Possibly a retry option for any of the hosts that responded to ping but failed SNMP. I wouldnt want to run a /16 scan twice only with a second SNMP string. How about letting me pick the items that failed to communicate via the first SNMP string and try them with a second SNMP string. rn5. Filters. Larger netscans can take many hours to finish. What if I only want my HP servers, or Cisco Switches. Maybe add some filter options to the netscan to increase the speed. For example only load hosts that respond and have a mac address for Cisco. Then you only need to run active discovery on those hosts. (the mac address was just an example, I dont know the best way to actually verify a specific OEM)rn rnEither way I think the Netscan process is very important for loading large amounts of devices or scanning entire subnets. There is lots of room for improvement in this area and I hope to see some development here. Happy to discuss this with any DEV should they have questions or need testing.

I totally agree. This is an important part of the product, that needs a bunch of work. It's just a question of when we get to it - we're adding developers as fast as we can!

I also agree with the Tom and Kwoodhouse on the NetScan implementation. Not having filters, and proper duplication techniques only adds more work for the operator to sift through the cruft.

Filtering, progress indicators, deduplication - now all in the updated netscan! (so long as you use 21.020 collector or later.)