Network Computingwww.networkcomputing.com

JOIN Systems JOIN IP Management System

In our lab tests, JOIN Systems' JOIN IP Management System was merely average in terms of features and data- liquidity capabilities. JOIN IP Management System excelled in scalability, but its interface was more difficult to use than the norm. JOIN IP's DHCP server, however, has had a long, well-established history. With its capability to offer large-scale service with its industry-leading servers, JOIN IP Management System is an extremely reliable choice. JOIN Systems has combined this DHCP server with a database and a GUI to provide a strong management system.

Running on Sun Microsystems' Solaris, JOIN IP Management System boasts a host of features that the products running on Microsoft Windows NT can't counter--speed being chief among them. Inherently faster on similar hardware, the JOIN IP system is extremely scalable and lightweight. Because it does not concern itself with Windows NT Server, JOIN IP offers stronger servers that are able to handle more data with a lower CPU strain.

During testing, however, we had trouble with JOIN's user interface. The GUI was not nearly as tight as some of the Windows NT-based IP management solutions or QIP's.

One of JOIN's more impressive features is its online help system, which is entirely written in HTML for easier browsing. It assisted us with many of the DHCP server's features, sparing us from having to dig out and comb through the printed manual.

MetaInfo Meta IP 4.0

Meta IP 4.0 provides a relatively complete system with a tight interface and robust built-in features, such as real-time statistics. Although it didn't fare too well in our overall tests, it provides some interesting additions, such as SNMP support. Meta IP didn't handle an environment with a large number of nodes very well; it is better suited for a Windows NT environment with a small number of workstations.

The first thing that stood out about Meta IP was its interface. Unlike the other products we tested, Meta IP had an administration interface contained completely within the Microsoft Internet Explorer browser as a Java applet. Since the ease of navigating was augmented with documentation, we were online with this product in no time.

Another Meta IP feature that we liked--and otherwise found only in IPcentral--was SNMP support. Shipping with an SNMP MIB, Meta IP plugs into any of the major network management products, including Hewlett-Packard Co.'s OpenView or Computer Associates International's Unicenter TNG. Nevertheless, Meta IP does not justify the cost of an OpenView or TNG license; these products are often used to monitor network statistics by major network operations centers. With OpenView integration, Meta IP can be monitored as easily as your networks.

One of the difficulties that plagued Meta IP in our tests was its scalability. Loaded into our test networks, which feature thousands of nodes, Meta IP's performance suffered right along with the other Windows NT-based products.

Meta IP, like Cisco's Network Registrar, can use LDAP servers for storing IP data. (In contrast, Network Registrar does not use LDAP as its primary database.) It employs one of the de facto LDAP servers--the University of Michigan's LDAP server, Slatd--to store all of its information. If LDAP is used more often in the industry, Meta IP can easily incorporate more of LDAP's features in its IP management product.

Cisco Systems Network Registrar 2.0

Cisco has revamped and revised Network Registrar. This release has a much cleaner interface and new features, such as DDNS support and DNS incremental updates.

Right from the start, you'll notice how simple Network Registrar's interface appears to be. The interface limits what you can do, making it much easier to navigate. Cisco has paid special attention to the interface's details by making the pop-up menus context-sensitive. As a result, we entered our network information without having to move the mouse around. This handy feature outdoes Network Telesystems' IPcentral.

But like Meta IP, Network Registrar falls short in data liquidity. With so many different parts of your network depending on these systems, closed systems that only export one type of file are not completely acceptable. Without the ability to export into anything other than DNS files, your data could be locked into Network Registrar.

In our tests, Network Registrar imported DNS data with ease, if not as effortlessly as Meta IP did. While, like Meta IP, Network Registrar only imports DNS zone files, it can not import the entire DNS database from a named.boot file. Consequently, if you must import a large number of subnets, you will need to import files individually. With the potential for multiple domains on multiple networks with different in.arpa addresses, this process could take a significant amount of time.

Network Registrar also simplifies the installation and operation procedures by using its own internal database. This functionality makes setup a breeze, so you don't need to rely on a database administrator.

Send comments on this article to Jeff Ballard at jballard@nwc.com.