From: <PG...@co...> - 2004-07-30 23:17:26
|
You *could* do this by defining each interface as a service under a single host. For the check_command for each service you would have something like check_ping_by_ip!<interface IP>. That would give you the cleaner host presentation. But you still define one thing for each interface. And you'd have to define check_ping_by_ip, of course. If you actually need to monitor multiple services for *each* interface it's going to be pretty big and unwieldy. I don't understand what you mean by "modifying the plugins"....you want to be able to give check_http (for instance) a list of IP addresses to check? Like you want to have a single host with a service called SERVICE and the check_command for that service looks something like "check_service IP1 IP2 IP3 IP4"? How does this make things easier to understand? It's still going to just show up in the Nagios GUI as a single service that's either up or down, no matter which interface doesn't work, right? So you've lost some diagnostic ability (someone needs to go look to see which interface is down). And you still need to put the 4 IP addresses into the config file by hand, although it may make the config itself smaller. It seems to me like you can either have simple and clean configurations with a cluttered presentation, or a simple and clean presentation with a cluttered configuration. I'm running into a similar problem with my Nagios setup at the moment....the "OO"-ness of the config system is neat, but doesn't have quite as many degrees of freedom as I'd like. I've basically given up on the "status summary" type pages being useful and figure the "tactical overview" will be the main screen used, from there you can drill directly down to the problem areas. Phil Dibowitz <ph...@us...> Sent by: nag...@li... 07/30/2004 03:49 PM To: nag...@li... cc: Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Multiple interfaces On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 03:32:18PM -0700, PG...@co... wrote: > I guess it depends on what you're trying to do. If you just want to make > sure you're hitting the interface that's closest to the nagios server, > then why not simply use *that* interface as the one defined in the host > object? And ignore the rest? > > If you actually need to monitor each interface (or services on each > interface) separately I don't see how to avoid the work of defining > multiple "things" even if you could find a way to do it without multiple > host definitions. You can make the multiple definitions easier with > hostgroups/templating etc so that you only define a service once, assign a > hostgroup to it, and put all your hosts (and their interfaces) in that > hostgroup. OK, let me be a bit more clear... I want all interfaces monitored with each server. However, having to define 10 or 15 services upwards of 5 times for each host gets very unmanagable. It makes the services.cfg file harder to read, and makes it more likely for people to make mistakes in it. Furthermore, it makes the webpage overviews less easy to look at at a glance. Instead of one: Host Service Service Service to look at, the NOC now has to look at 5 or 8 or 10. The whole point of moving to nagios is to make things less confusing for the NOC so that us admins get less 3am calls ;) Sorry, I should have make that more clear. Now having said that, if I have to have 5 host definitions and make a host group out of it, then so be it, I will -- but that just seems unclean to me. I'll probably make someone here modify the plugins... though we're understaffed here, so I'd rather not. -- Phil Dibowitz Systems Architect and Administrator Enterprise Infrastructure / ISD / USC UCC 174 - 213-821-5427 |