French: acquittement des alarmesEnglish translation: retiring or silencing alarms 
KudoZ The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators ... More  |
|
| GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | | French term or phrase: | acquittement des alarmes | | English translation: | retiring or silencing alarms | | Entered by: | lokilo |
| Options:
- Contribute to this entry |
French to English translations [PRO]
Tech/Engineering - Computers: Systems, Networks / Telecoms | | French term or phrase: acquittement des alarmes | (System operating policies, section on alerts, "acquittement" of alerts in case of problem disappearance).
I've seen (here and elsewhere) acquitter as "acknowledge," but b/c it has other meanings (that seem better here), I'm hesitating:
une alarme critique est automatiquement acquittee par l'arrivee de l'alarme normale equivalente. Les alarmes normales sont automatiquement acquittees.
I'm not sure if it's acknowledged (cancelled?), b/c it seems that the normal alert overrides the critical alert? but the second seems to be simply acknowledged.
Thanks for any help |
| lokiloKudoZ activityQuestions: 14 (all closed) Answers: 15
United States
| |
| Clarification request(s) and responselokilo (asker): 4:30pm Aug 16, 2005: All these comments are very helpful. It is my understanding that the critical alarm had been acknowledged. This particular rule/section describes the procedure in cases of problem resolution. Presumably the IT tech guru stepped in, she took care of the problem (she always does), the system is back to normal so it generates a normal alarm, which is acknowledged (because all normal alarms are acknowledge), but which also does ??? to that first critical alarm... I'm having a hard time seeing how a normal (acknowledged) alarm can acknowledge an acknowledged critical alarm...
|
|
| | retiring or silencing alarms | Explanation:
For this phrase, "retiring or silencing an alarm" can in general be used instead of "acknowledging an alarm". In this case I agree with you that acknowledging doesn't sound right so retiring would be my choice.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs 41 mins (2005-08-16 17:18:46 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I disagree with your disagree: silencing means the audible or visible (yes, I know) sound or display is stopped, but the management system does retain a record of the alarm and the alarm is still open and requires further action. Acknowledgement is similar; it means that a technician (which is why it doesn\'t make sense in this context where a system takes the action) has made some entry to update the record or log for the trouble (\"I saw this and left a message for the day shift\", \"I called a technician to replace a circuit pack\"). In both cases there is no indication that the underlying cause of the alarm in the netowrk has had been changed or addressed. Both are purely administrative steps in the managment system. Integrity of the operations, historical investigation of (repeated) troubles, and audit trails all require that the record remains in the system. None of these steps result in the deletion of the record; they only change the status. Retiring has more of an implication that the alarm does not need further action, however there may be tracking in to the management system to make sure that the alarm doesn\'t reccur and go back to normal repeatedly.
Concerning the asker\'s question: most SNMP, CLI or TL1 management systems will attempt to correlate alarms or events from the same equipment (or equipment hierarchy). Further, the hardware will report when the condition causing the alarm has gone away; I assume this is the source of your \"alarme normale\". The condition could go away because of the technician\'s intervention (in your example), because the hardware started diagnostics or reset a module when it detected the condition that it reported in the alarm, or because some external circumstance changed. (Annecdotes about cleaning crews unplugging a CSU/DSU to plug in a vacuum cleaner are legion.) The original \"there\'s a problem here\" and the \"now everything is OK\" alarms need to get matched up with the consequence that the management system shows that the hardware is working correctly reflecting what the equipment in the network reported.
Former Bell Labs system engineer; I speak of what I know from experience in the industry. |
| Selected response from:
Bruce Popp
United States
| Note from asker to answererYou know what they say... "Don't mess with T..." I mean "with Bell Labs."
Once again, thank you very much Bruce, and everyone else for all their help.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer |
|
21 mins confidence:   |
4 hrs confidence: peer agreement (net): -1 |
| cancelling of alarms
Explanation:
I would say that in your given context, 'cancel' is more appropriate than 'acknowledge' (more to do with intervention by a human supervisor)
Here, the 'critical' alarm is automatically cancelled if an equivalent 'normal' alarm comes in (it over-rides it...); makes sense, even though at first sight one might have thought that the logic is reversed...
|  Tony M
France
Native speaker of:  English
PRO pts in category: 59
|
|
| | Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
4 hrs confidence: peer agreement (net): -1 |
12 hrs confidence: peer agreement (net): -1 |
| acknowledgement
Explanation:
Dans le transport ferroviaire, lorsqu'il s'agit d'une alarme générée par le système informatique, l'acquittement (acknowledgement) par le mécanicien ou le système informatique lui-même est obligatoire, à moins que cette alarme soit acquittée (c'est à dire prise en compte) par l'apparition d'une autre alarme. Il s'agit en général de défaillances qui génèrent une alarme
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs 15 mins (2005-08-16 15:52:18 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Ce terme a été systématiquement utilisé dans le cadre du projet Eurostar et dans de nombreux projets ferroviaires et a été retenue par l\'UIC (Union Internationale des Chemins de fer.
| cdixmier
France
Works in field
Native speaker of: French
|
|
| | Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
22 mins confidence: |
| retiring or silencing alarms
Explanation:
For this phrase, "retiring or silencing an alarm" can in general be used instead of "acknowledging an alarm". In this case I agree with you that acknowledging doesn't sound right so retiring would be my choice.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 13 hrs 41 mins (2005-08-16 17:18:46 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
I disagree with your disagree: silencing means the audible or visible (yes, I know) sound or display is stopped, but the management system does retain a record of the alarm and the alarm is still open and requires further action. Acknowledgement is similar; it means that a technician (which is why it doesn\'t make sense in this context where a system takes the action) has made some entry to update the record or log for the trouble (\"I saw this and left a message for the day shift\", \"I called a technician to replace a circuit pack\"). In both cases there is no indication that the underlying cause of the alarm in the netowrk has had been changed or addressed. Both are purely administrative steps in the managment system. Integrity of the operations, historical investigation of (repeated) troubles, and audit trails all require that the record remains in the system. None of these steps result in the deletion of the record; they only change the status. Retiring has more of an implication that the alarm does not need further action, however there may be tracking in to the management system to make sure that the alarm doesn\'t reccur and go back to normal repeatedly.
Concerning the asker\'s question: most SNMP, CLI or TL1 management systems will attempt to correlate alarms or events from the same equipment (or equipment hierarchy). Further, the hardware will report when the condition causing the alarm has gone away; I assume this is the source of your \"alarme normale\". The condition could go away because of the technician\'s intervention (in your example), because the hardware started diagnostics or reset a module when it detected the condition that it reported in the alarm, or because some external circumstance changed. (Annecdotes about cleaning crews unplugging a CSU/DSU to plug in a vacuum cleaner are legion.) The original \"there\'s a problem here\" and the \"now everything is OK\" alarms need to get matched up with the consequence that the management system shows that the hardware is working correctly reflecting what the equipment in the network reported.
Former Bell Labs system engineer; I speak of what I know from experience in the industry.
| Bruce Popp
United States
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 16
|
| Note from asker to answererYou know what they say... "Don't mess with T..." I mean "with Bell Labs."
Once again, thank you very much Bruce, and everyone else for all their help. |
|
Return to KudoZ list
|
| |
The translation workplace 
