Sane (ab)use of escalations?

[Wil Cooley]

For the sake of posterity: The problem with the scheme that I have
proposed below is that it breaks using contacts as web access-control
for hosts, services, etc., so you have to use the 'authorized_for_*'
directives in cgi.cfg.

Wil

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 15:28 -0700, Wil Cooley wrote: 
> We are in the process of rebuilding our Nagios setup, which is an
> ancient 1.x installation, to 3.2.1.
> 
> We want to re-implement the following policy for notifications:
>  * During the work day, everyone in contactgroup gets notifications
>  * Outside of working hours,
>    * On-call person gets paged immediately
>    * Everyone in contactgroup gets paged after 5 notifications
> 
> This is currently implemented by having 2 contact objects for every
> user, one for work-hours and one for off-hours, each with appropriate
> *_notification_periods. Notifications go to all N*2 contacts and the
> individual contact's notification periods handles whether or not to
> page.
> 
> I believe we can implement the policy using escalations. First, all
> hosts & services have a contact that delivers notifications to a shared
> IMAP folder, to get around the requirement of these objects having
> contacts.
> 
> Next, to implement the work-hours piece, a service escalation such as:
> 
> define serviceescalation {
>   hostgroup_name 	unix-hosts
>   service_description	*
>   contact_groups 	unix-admins
>   first_notification 	1
>   last_notification 	0
>   escalation_period 	work-hours
> }
> 
> And a corresponding hostescalation.
> 
> To implement the off-hours piece, escalations such as:
> 
> define serviceescalation {
>   hostgroup_name	unix-hosts
>   contact_groups	on-call
>   service_description 	*
>   first_notification 	1
>   last_notification 	0
>   escalation_period 	off-hours
> }
> 
> define serviceescalation {
>   hostgroup_name	unix-hosts
>   contact_groups	unix-admins
>   service_description 	*
>   first_notification	5
>   last_notification	0
>   escalation_options	c
>   escalation_period	off-hours
> }
> 
> With this setup, all "real" notifications happen through these
> escalations, in effect using them as a "servicenotification" object,
> which kinda seems better from a data-normalization perspective (but
> IANADBA).
> 
> Does this seem like it should work as I expect? Can anyone see any
> problems? I have not actually tried this, so I don't know if it works.
> 
> As an aside, does anyone have any ideas of how to test this kind of
> thing? Perhaps submitting passive check results and having timeperiods
> of "oddminutes" and "evenminutes"?
> 
> Wil
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by 
> 
> Make an app they can't live without
> Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://www.monitoring-lists.org/archive/users/attachments/20100901/7e030cf8/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
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