Hosts with no services?

[John Senior]

I disagree - I have many many devices on my network that I just need
to
know are alive with a ping - these devices just provide connectivity,
things
like switches, customer routers etc.  A simple ping is all that's
required,
no more.  I have plenty of hosts with more complex services (web,
mail, dns
etc.) that Nagios fits fine - but sometimes a ping is enough.  I too
am using
fping to provide the kind of info that I would rather integrate into
Nagios.

Regards,

John.

--
John Senior <js at irishbroadband.ie>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net
> [mailto:nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net]On Behalf Of Dr.
Dave
> Blunt
> Sent: 26 June 2003 04:54
> To: 'Carroll, Jim P [Contractor]'; 'Furnish, Trever G'
> Cc: 'Nagios-Users List (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] Hosts with no services?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I think I agree with Jim.  I guess I don't see why you would care if
a
> system was up if you didn't care about at least one service - unless
> that 'service' is keeping the room warm.  Why not pull the power
cord
> now?  If you're not responsible for making sure the system is up or
> tracking some metric about specific services then why even
> configure it
> in Nagios?
>
> $.02
>
>
> Dr. Dave Blunt
> Manager of Information Technology, Virage, Inc.
> 411 Borel Ave., Suite 100S
> San Mateo, CA 94402
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net
> [mailto:nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf
> Of Carroll,
> Jim P [Contractor]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 5:54 PM
> To: Furnish, Trever G
> Cc: Nagios-Users List (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] Hosts with no services?
>
>
> I suppose you could use check_dummy for your service check.  Caveat:
> I've experienced hosts which are pingable but are otherwise
> worthless/dead.  You've stated yourself that you need to know that
the
> box is alive.  So what constitutes 'alive'?  If I can ping a box but
a
> user cannot login to that box, is it still alive?  If I can't ping
the
> box but when I walk over to it, there are blinking lights and
whirring
> fans, is it still alive?  If the main HDD activity light is
flickering
> but bashing away on the console doesn't get me any response,
> is it still
> alive?  (These are purely rhetorical questions.)
>
> If you'd like to know within 5 minutes that a user cannot use
service
> XYZ, then configure Nagios to monitor the health of that service and
> check on it frequently.  If you don't mind that a user cannot
> login to a
> host between 5pm and 9am, then configure Nagios to not bother
checking
> between those times (thus cutting down on 'unnecessary' CPU
> and network
> traffic).
>
> If you don't mind that your root filesystem is sitting at 99.99%
> capacity, then don't bother with check_disk.  If you don't
> mind the load
> average hitting 20 frequently, then don't bother with check_load.
If
> you don't mind that a HDD is starting to complain about bad
> blocks, then
> don't bother with check_log2.
>
> Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate here.  If after everything I've
said
> you still find keeping a finger on the pulse of the corporate
> systems to
> be uninteresting, then take another look at check_dummy, and
> replace the
> check_ping service with it.  (Bonus:  You'll cut down on
> network traffic
> and remote processing.  ;)
>
> jc
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Furnish, Trever G [mailto:TGFurnish at herff-jones.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 2:16 PM
> > To: Carroll, Jim P [Contractor]
> > Cc: Nagios-Users List (E-mail)
> > Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] Hosts with no services?
> >
> >
> > But why should you monitor something you don't care about,
> generating
> > needless traffic and cpu overhead?
> >
> > I too do a ping in the host check and a redundant ping
> > service check - but
> > it's still a waste.  Sure there are other services on the
> > box, but I don't
> > need to monitor them -- all I need is to know the box is
> > alive, in which
> > case the extra ping is pointless and wastes resources.
> >
> > In a previous life I did this with a little shell script and
> > fping.  You
> > lose the benefit of being able to acknowledge individual
> > hosts that way
> > though.  Then again, if you allow your techs to log into the
> > system doing
> > fping, then adding a host a file listing those to ignore
> becomes easy.
> >
> > -t.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU
> Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU
> Hosting Partner.
> Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly
> Commission!
> INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting
http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php
> _______________________________________________
> 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: INetU
> Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU
> Hosting Partner.
> Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly
> Commission!
> INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting
http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php
> _______________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.monitoring-lists.org/archive/users/attachments/20030626/459d10ec/attachment.html>