GUP indication in Help and Support > Troubleshooting
Created: 31 Mar 2010 | 6 comments
The Help and Support > Troubleshooting page of the client user interface should include some indication when the client is acting as a GUP.
Comments
I agree. This would be a
I agree.
This would be a great way for the user to be able to be sure that the client is acting as a Gup on the user end.
This is incredibly important
This is incredibly important in a large WAN environment with slower connections. SAV 10 had a great WAN setup. Much of the WAN functionality was lost with SEP design changes. I can't easily tell if my higher traffic is due to a bad GUP policy or just high traffic. It would be great to have a nice simple report in the console.
It would also to nice to export client inventory reports with hardware since the functionality seems to be in place already.
GUP Logging
Maybe this should be a new "idea"... but I'll put it here for now.
I would also like to suggest that this idea be extended to better and more accessible GUP logging... since the only way to log GUP activity is through client debugging (Sylink logging on the non-GUP clients and Debug logging on the GUP itself).
There are any number of ways to implement this:
1. Add it to an existing log
- The Client Management > System log already notes when the client turns on as a GUP.
2. Create a new log
- This would allow for more flexibility with the logging... you can include more events and it won't clutter the other logs and afford options to filter certain events.
You should be able to easily tell a number of basic things about the GUPs:
- When it gets content from the SEPM
- How big the content that it received was
- When it passed content to other clients
- The content was delivered to each client
GUP logging, YES!
GUP logging, YES!
Definitely, yes.
Definitely, yes.
It would be very helpful to
It would be very helpful to see the connected clients to the gup (ip adresses or names) or on the client the ip address (or name) of the GUP
as the empty MasterClientHost field is misleading in the last version, it made us think we had an issue with the GUP connectivity while there was no real issue and we wasted precious time in finding out what was going on.
Would you like to reply?
Login or Register to post your comment.