Patch - incorrect default for aggressive_host_checking

[Joe Rhett]

The analysis below is correct.  We should either update the documentation 
and configuration files to reflect this, or apply the following patch:

*** base/nagios.h.in_orig       Fri Aug 27 14:47:54 2004
--- base/nagios.h.in    Fri Aug 27 14:48:02 2004
***************
*** 80,86 ****
  #define DEFAULT_LOG_EXTERNAL_COMMANDS         1       /* log external commands */
  #define DEFAULT_LOG_PASSIVE_CHECKS            1       /* log passive service checks */

! #define DEFAULT_AGGRESSIVE_HOST_CHECKING      1       /* use "aggressive" host checking */
  #define DEFAULT_CHECK_EXTERNAL_COMMANDS               0       /* don't check for external commands */
  #define DEFAULT_CHECK_ORPHANED_SERVICES               0       /* don't check for orphaned services */
  #define DEFAULT_ENABLE_FLAP_DETECTION           0       /* don't enable flap detection */
--- 80,86 ----
  #define DEFAULT_LOG_EXTERNAL_COMMANDS         1       /* log external commands */
  #define DEFAULT_LOG_PASSIVE_CHECKS            1       /* log passive service checks */

! #define DEFAULT_AGGRESSIVE_HOST_CHECKING      0       /* use "aggressive" host checking */
  #define DEFAULT_CHECK_EXTERNAL_COMMANDS               0       /* don't check for external commands */
  #define DEFAULT_CHECK_ORPHANED_SERVICES               0       /* don't check for orphaned services */
  #define DEFAULT_ENABLE_FLAP_DETECTION           0       /* don't enable flap detection */

On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 06:31:33PM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> After pulling down the default configs, and comparing my nagios.cfg with 
> its nagios.cfg, I started adding in various things that weren't in the 
> nagios.cfg we deploy because the documentation states they have default 
> values.
> 
> At some point, host down alerts started working as expected, so I backed 
> out the changes until they stopped working again.
> 
> This occurred at the point at which I removed the 
> "use_aggressive_host_checking=0" line (My email client will not let me 
> spell it the incorrect way it is spelled in Nagios :P ).
> 
> According to the Nagios documentation, this parameter is supposed to be 
> defaulted to 0:
> 
> <http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/1_0/configmain.html#use_aggressive_host_checking>
> 
> (Damn, even the link is wrong because my email client is throwing in the 
> extra g to make it spelled correctly).
> 
> So there is a bug in that logic somewhere.
> 
> obsess_over_services
> 
> does not exhibit similar behavior with services, since I didn't have that 
> defined either, and service alerts were never an issue.
> 
> --Quanah
> 
> --
> Quanah Gibson-Mount
> Principal Software Developer
> ITSS/Shared Services
> Stanford University
> GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media
> 100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33
> Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift.
> http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285
> _______________________________________________
> Nagios-users mailing list
> Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
> ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when 
> reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being 
> sent to /dev/null

-- 
Joe Rhett
Senior Geek
Meer.net


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop
FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools!
Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null