Good afternoon, is there perhaps someone that has used User Defined API's to replace SNMP traps so one could have more freedom?
I would like to know if this could be a viable solution and if this has been tested at scale for a busy network for example a network with about 3000+ elements with about 1000+ events per day that could be any range of severities.
I have played around a bit with the user defined API example that retrieves elements based on alarm severity and a limit so I would guess something like this is possible. However, we are thinking more in the line of requesting the last events from a given alarm id every 30 seconds to ensure so no alarms are "missed" should we have a network interruption or some reason for the end system to not be able to poll the user defined API endpoint.
Thank you, your inputs are welcomed and appreciated!
Hi Johannes,
Creating your own APIs can be very beneficial as it gives you greater control over the information you retrieve from DataMiner. In a large system, efficiency is key. User-defined APIs enable you to retrieve the specific information you need, when you need it.
Solicited vs Unsolicited data
SNMP traps are an example of unsolicited data. This type of communication responds to a different need: quickly receiving updates in near real-time without having to query DataMiner.
That's why, rather than replacing SNMP traps, User-defined APIs can complement them by adding the possibility of regularly querying the system and resolving any inconsistency that may have resulted from the unreliable nature of UDP communication.
If you want to explore a more reliable method of sending unsolicited data from DataMiner to a 3rd party application, check out TCP-IP sockets:
In conclusion, your solution could combine unsolicited data transport mechanisms, such as SNMP traps or TCP-IP sockets, with solicited data mechanisms like API queries. This strategy would reduce the frequency of API queries, which in turn would help reduce the system load.