FAQ: Passive host checks?

[Ethan Galstad]

I am investigating the possibility of adding passive host checks in 
2.0.  However, allowing passive checks opens a whole new can of worms 
as far as host check logic is concerned.  For instance, if a host is 
reported (passively) as being down (it was previously up), what 
should happen with child hosts?  Should those be actively checked 
according to the current tree traversal logic?  Also, host checks are 
performed on-demand only (synchronously), so how do you handle 
asynchronous results?  Host checks also get priority over pending 
passive service check results, so that has to be figured out.

Anyway, it isn't exactly trivial without changing a good portion of 
how the host check logic works.  I'll be looking into it though...


On 2 Oct 2002 at 8:52, Jason Marshall wrote:

> > Passive *service* checks are well documented; passive *host* checks
> > are not.
> 
> There are no passive host checks.  I tried that already, and it always
> uses the active method, and ignores passive updates (which are, granted,
> documented as service check updates).
> 
> I, too, would like a way to monitor hosts that isn't based on Nagios's
> large-grain checking granularity.  I can tell within 2 seconds if a router
> that lots of other hosts are dependent upon are down -- I don't want the
> remote hosts being checked for up to a full minute (and failing, thereby
> alerting me) when it's really the router that'd down.  If I could tell
> nagios (passively) within 2 seconds of the incident that the router is
> down, I'd avoid a lot of spurious alerts...
> 
> > My current workaround is to define a service called ALIVE and
> > report passive service checks for that service, but that is not
> > 100% satisfying.
> 
> I agree.  I haven't looked at the part of the code that would make passive
> host checks possible, but it seems like it could be a major undertaking...
> And there could be underlying reasons why such a check would be a bad
> thing...
> 
> ---
> Jason Marshall, Unix Geek, Kelman Technologies, Inc., Calgary, AB, Canada.
> 
>   From a Sun Microsystems bug report (#4102680):
>     "Workaround: don't pound on the mouse like a wild monkey."
> 
>   "I have great faith in fools: 
>      Self confidence my friends call it."  -Edgar Allan Poe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Nagios-users mailing list
> Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
> 



Ethan Galstad,
Nagios Developer
---
Email: nagios at nagios.org
Website: http://www.nagios.org



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf