check_ping vs check_icmp?

[Marc Powell]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:nagios-users-
> bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Rogelio Bastardo
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 12:37 PM
> To: Nagios Users mailinglist
> Subject: [Nagios-users] check_ping vs check_icmp?
> 
> I just recently noticed that there is a check_ping and a check_icmp
> plugin.
> 
> I ran "./check_plugin --help" on each, but am still unclear as to what
> each does differently.  Does check_icmp include traceroute and other
> non-ping ICMP checks?

check_ping is a wrapper for /bin/ping and so depends on that program to
actually perform the check, parsing it's output to determine success or
not. check_icmp performs the check itself. check_icmp is much more
efficient than check_ping, typically completing in fractions of a second
for 10 pings. Here's a graphic example, 50 pings, 49 seconds for
check_ping v.s. 1.2 seconds for check_icmp --

$ time ./check_ping -n 50 -H www.ena.com -w500,50% -c 1000,100%
PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 1.78 ms

real    0m49.197s
user    0m0.000s
sys     0m0.020s

time ./check_icmp -n 50 -H www.ena.com -w500,50% -c 1000,100%
OK - www.ena.com: rta 0.40 ms, lost 0%|rta=0.40ms;500;1000;;
pl=0%;50;100;;

real    0m1.229s
user    0m0.530s
sys     0m0.700s

--
Marc

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
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