<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:sans-serif;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-CA link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I would wager that the benefit could be
considered in both contexts! For example, the only scenarios that I’ve
set up distributed monitoring for are WAN networks spread over prohibitive
distances – and it works very well!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=navy face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Daniel Maher</span></font></b></strong><font
color=navy><span style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>System Engineer</span></font><font
color=navy><span style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>ACE TECHNOLOGY INC.</span></font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Tahoma><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
nagios-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
[mailto:nagios-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] <b><span style='font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Toby Kraft<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> July 20, 2005 2:59 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b>
nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> [Nagios-users]
distributed monitoring = remote monitoring?</span></font><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
</span></font><font size=2 face=sans-serif><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:sans-serif'>All,</span></font> <br>
<br>
<font size=2 face=sans-serif><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif'>Question
regarding distributed monitoring - is the benefit of this configuration
primarily to distribute the service check workload among several servers or is
it used primarily to support a distributed WAN environment allowing you to have
active checking nagios boxes in remote locations that funnel their status
results to a central monitoring nagios server?</span></font> <br>
<br>
<font size=2 face=sans-serif><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif'>The
docs say it's for offloading cpu load and don't really talk about remote
locations and such. But the architecture seems to fit a distributed WAN
environment.</span></font> <br>
<br>
<font size=2 face=sans-serif><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif'>I
have a couple of clients that have, say, 3-5 locations, each with < 10 hosts
and 20-30 services at each site to monitor. I was under the impression
that the distributed approach would isolate the traffic for the active service
checks to the local lan and only send status info to the central server when
something 'interesting' happens. Is that correct? Is this kind of
environment suitable for distributed nagios or would it be overkill to go the
distributed route?</span></font> <br>
<br>
<font size=2 face=sans-serif><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif'>Thanks,</span></font>
<br>
<br>
<font size=2 face=sans-serif><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:sans-serif'>Toby</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>