Notification Woes

[Larry Low]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Guyot-Sionnest [mailto:dermoth at aei.ca]
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:42 AM
> To: Larry Low
> Cc: 'Nagios Users Mailinglist'
> Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Notification Woes
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 14/02/08 03:21 PM, Larry Low wrote:
> > Service X actively checked every 60 minutes.
> > Service X passively monitored through SNMP Traps.
> >
> > Service X receives CRITICAL passively.  E-mail to contact A.  Modify
> Service
> > X to actively poll every 5 minutes till recovery.  Email B after 3rd
> > CRITICAL (10-15 minute delay).
> >
> > I can't use retry_interval because I want contact A to be notified
> all the
> > time and retry_interval is only used on SOFT states.
> >
> > I was thinking of executing a change in polling interval with an
> event
> > handler.
> >
> > Any insight?
> >
> > I'm also curious on how flap alerts are handled under
> serviceescalation.  I
> > am assuming they are not.
> 
> I'm not quite sure what you're trying, but a simpler solution might be
> to have two services:
> 
> 1 volatile service (passive, will notify on every trap received)
> 1 active service (will have whichever max_check_attempt and
> retry_interval you want, won't be affected by passive checks)
> 
> If you need escalations on top of that you can define some.
> 
> 
> Otherwise you're pretty much on your own. It's very difficult to
> remotely understand every details of the logic you want (considering
> there will be corner cases, etc). So basically understand how nagios
> will react to each setting, or use something simpler as above ;)
> 
> Thomas

Thanks for the input.  I would like to avoid having separate services for
the active and passive as it is the main reason I even use Nagios (easy to
make sure active and passive alerts keep status accurate for a service).

I am working on using an event handler to change the polling interval from
60 to 5 minutes on a non OK and 5 to 60 on an OK.  I'm not sure how well
this will work with passive checks but it seems like the best solution for
me.  I'm just worried about problems occurring and inconsistencies being
created.


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFHtV536dZ+Kt5BchYRAkZDAKD8Fi8FFAw/a9r/bnqNkituvaauvgCdH8Xm
> 1eFuhM38mouu96GAmLc87Ck=
> =Y/Il
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
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