[c-nsp] Feedback on "terminal exec prompt timestamp"

[Chuck Church]

I agree, changing the default isn't the best idea.  However, the inclusion
of cpu load as available output during logging might be pretty slick.
Something like this:

Nov 10 13:14:44.473 EST: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor 366.215.152.165 Down
Interface flap

could become:

Nov 10 13:14:44.473 EST: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor 536.215.152.165 Down
Interface flap; Load for five secs: 4%/0%; one minute: 3%; five minutes: 3%

with an available logging option set.  Seeing what the CPU was doing for 5
seconds or a minute prior to an event would be useful, as this kind of
resolution isn't available in the 'sh proc cpu hist' command more than a
minute after the event happened.  Or is this available, and I just haven't
stumbled upon it?

Thanks,

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Dmitry Valdov
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 1:15 PM
To: Preston Chilcote (pchilcot)
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Feedback on "terminal exec prompt timestamp"



Changing defaults is a bad idea by default. People should think twice before
doing this.

It's very unconvinient to see extra (totally unuseful) information when
you're trying to find a problem. When I'm issuing a "show ip route" command
I don't want to see what time source and processor load are.

But as far as I could turn this off I'm fine. Just because I can run a
script which will turn this "feature" off on all my devices.


On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Preston Chilcote (pchilcot) wrote:

> Some folks in TAC are pushing to get "terminal exec prompt timestamp"
> turned on by default.  This would add 2 lines to every command being 
> run.  For example:
>
> Router#show arp
> Load for five secs: 4%/0%; one minute: 3%; five minutes: 3% Time 
> source is NTP, 09:43:00.607 PST Wed Feb 15 2012
>
> We'd love to hear what you guys think.  Whether it would be annoying, 
> impact operations (maybe scripts you have running), or does anyone use 
> this routinely already?
>
> Negative and positive feedback is encouraged.
>
> Thanks,
> Preston Chilcote
> Cisco TAC
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net 
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>

--
Dmitry Valdov
CCIE #15379 (R&S and SP)
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/