Host w/o services are no longer doing check-alive-tests

[Marc Powell]

You may have found a bug but it's not the bug you're hoping for. Nagios
is primarily a service monitor. Host checks should not be executed at
all unless a service check for that host fails. If a host has no
services defined then it should never be checked. The parenting aspect
_might_ throw in a weird loophole in that logic but it certainly should
not be counted on.

For your router example (I monitor about 1700 of them), define a
host-check of just 1 ping and a service check of 10 pings or whatever
you feel comfortable with.

Did you ever have services defined for those hosts that were previously
showing as up? Do you have retain_state_information enabled? That
combination might explain why they had an OK status as opposed to
PENDING.

--
Marc

*Please reply to the list. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralf Mellis [mailto:testrm at kisters.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 10:13 AM
> To: nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> 
> 
> Hi, I'm using nagios 1.0 with plugins 1.3 on a linux host.
> I have several hosts and services set up successfully.
> The only drawback: I have some hosts with no services associated yet
> (routers), they have only a "check_command check-host-alive" in their
> host definition (defined as "command_line $USER1$/check_ping -H
> $HOSTADDRESS$ -w 3000.0,80% -c 5000.0,100% -p 1").
> In the beginning (one week ago) all hosts were regularly checked with
> this command and reported as "UP" in the web gui. Since yesterday
these
> hosts still are reported as "UP", but the last checks are executed the
> last time many hours in the past (up to 30h). In addition three newly
> defined hosts without services are in state "pending" since definition
> and reload/restart of the nagios process.
> All other defined hosts with associated services are checked in the
> intervals defined in their host definition.
> The changes I made in the last time were setting up "parents"
> definitions accordingly to my network layout. I have checked these
> definitions over and over and IMHO they seem to be OK ("nagios -v
> nagios.cfg" only gives some warnings regarding having hosts with no
> services associated).
> In addition the status map is showing exactly what I wanted to define.
> 
> Do one have to define services for each host defined? I can't believe
> this, because a router in my opinion is fully functional (at least in
> the first step), if it is "alive" (reachable via ping).
> 
> Hmm...
> 
> Regards
> 
> --
> Ralf Mellis
> Abt. DV/ORG
> Kisters Maschinenbau GmbH
> Germany
> 47533 Kleve
> Boschstr. 1-3
> Tel. +49(0)2821-503-0
> Fax  +49(0)2821-26110
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when
> reporting any issue.
> ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null


-------------------------------------------------------
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
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null