host_port objects - Enhancement Request

[Rutger Blom]

I use check_mk which automatically does a host inventory and adds
active interfaces to the configuration.
Off topic: I have to say the check_mk in combination with
mk_livestatus and multisite make Nagios a much better solution. I
wonder if and when the Nagios team is going to adopt this solution and
make it a part of Nagios Core.

/Rutger

On Thursday, October 28, 2010, Jason Frisvold <frisvolj at lafayette.edu> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Greetings,
>
>         We are planning on submitting an enhancement request to Nagios with the
> intention of having their professional services group code this for us.
>  We are interested in having our changes made available to the community
> as well, so we wanted to get feedback from the community before we
> submit the proposal.  Any and all feedback is welcome.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Nagios Enhancement Proposal
>
> Overview
>
> Currently, there are two primary ways to add individual physical ports
> for a port-based device.  Each method has both advantages and
> disadvantages, but neither fully satisfies the needs of Lafayette and,
> likely, other institutions.
>
> Service-based Ports
>
> The first method is to treat ports as a service of a host and add them
> as service entries.  The following configuration snippet demonstrates this :
>
> define host {
>    use                  cisco-switch-standard
>    host_name            switch.lafayette.edu
>    address              192.168.0.100
>    hostgroups           cisco-switch-standard
>    parents              router.lafayette.edu
> }
>
> define service {
>    use                  service-standard
>    hosts                switch.lafayette.edu
>    servicegroups        cisco-switch-standard
>    service_description  Switch Port Gi1/0/1
>    check_command        check_snmp_traffic!-N Gi1/0/1!-C $USER2$
> }
>
> In short, this configuration defines a host and then a service for that
> host which is, essentially, an snmp check that monitors the traffic on a
> specific port.
>
> Advantages
> * Cleanly links a port to a switch
> * Somewhat easy to add/remove specific hosts that need that port monitored
>
> Disadvantages
> * Parent/child relationships are difficult, if not impossible, to define
> * Making service changes for a single port requires creating a unique
> new service
> * Service descriptions can get a bit long when they need to have a
> meaningful description associated with them
> * Ports with associated addresses are more difficult to define
>
>
> Host-based Ports
>
> Another method to accomplish this is to create a “fake” host entry for
> each port and then assign services to those ports for monitoring.  The
> following configuration snippet demonstrates this :
>
> define host {
>    use                  cisco-switch-standard
>    host_name            switch.lafayette.edu
>    address              192.168.0.100
>    hostgroups           cisco-switch-standard
>    parents              router.lafayette.edu
> }
>
> define host {
>    use                  cisco-switch-standard
>    host_name            switch-g1-0-1.lafayette.edu
>    address              192.168.0.100
>    hostgroups           cisco-switch-standard
>    _PORT                Gi1/0/1
>    parents              switch.lafayette.edu
> }
>
> define service {
>    use                  service-standard
>    hosts                switch.lafayette.edu
>    servicegroups        cisco-switch-standard
>    service_description  Port Traffic
>    check_command        check_snmp_traffic!-N $_HOSTPORT$!-C $USER2$
> }
>
> This configuration defines two hosts, a switch and a port on that
> switch, and then a service linked to the port.
>
> Advantages
> * Parent/child relationships work as expected
> * A single service entry can be used for many port entries
> * Very easy to deal with address-assigned ports such as router interfaces
>
> Disadvantages
> * Every port on every switch has to be defined
> * Port host_name entries are often fake
> * Port address entries are often duplicated
>
>
> Proposed Solution
>
> host-port object
>
> define host {
>    use                  cisco-switch-standard
>    host_name            switch.lafayette.edu
>    address              192.168.0.100
>    hostgroups           cisco-switch-standard
>    parents              router.lafayette.edu
> }
>
> define host_port {
>    use                  cisco-switch-standard
>    host                 switch.lafayette.edu
>    port_name            Gi1/0/1
> }
>
> define service {
>    use                  service-standard
>    host                 switch.lafayette.edu
>    port_based           true
>    servicegroups        cisco-switch-standard
>    service_description  Port Traffic
>    check_command        check_snmp_traffic!-N $PORTNAME$!-C $USER2$
> }
>
> In this proposed configuration, a host is defined, as normal.  A new
> object, the host_port object, is defined with port-based information.
> The host_port object imports information such as address and host_name
> from the host but can override this information if needed.  For
> instance, a router interface may have an ip address and hostname.
> Finally, a new tag, port_name, identifies the port name to use.  When
> displaying the host_port in the GUI, or identifying it in email/SMS, the
> port_name should be appended to the host_name.  A similar syntax could
> be used for parent/child relationships as well.
>
> The service definition uses a new tag, port_based, to identify that this
> service is for the ports of a host, not for the host itself.  This
> service should be applied to all ports.  port_name can be used in a
> manner similar to host or hostgroups to restrict the service to specific
> ports.
>
> Advantages
> * Clearly links ports to hosts
> * Parent/child relationships can be clearly defined
> * A single service entry can be used for many port entries
> * Very easy to deal with address-assigned ports such as router interfaces
>
> Disadvantages
> * Every port has to be defined
> * Concatenated host/port names can get a bit long
>
> - --
> - ---------------------------
> Jason Frisvold
> Network Engineer
> frisvolj at lafayette.edu
> - ---------------------------
> "What I cannot create, I do not understand"
>    - Richard Feynman
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkzJk7EACgkQO80o6DJ8UvkfDACeLtvq+tm2W+Muz32SOopnqo4J
> /6MAmgM5Gvmp26npPTOl2oY93NBh+hn0
> =u3pW
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest
> Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in  U.S. and Canada
> $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing
> Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-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
>

-- 
Rutger Blom
Luzernvägen 14
227 38 LUND
Sweden
Tel. +46 763 46 99 44
www.rutgerblom.com
about.me/rutgerblom

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest
Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in  U.S. and Canada
$10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing
Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-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