On Thu, 24 Dec 1998, Jim Cassata wrote:
> Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 22:55:56 -0500 (EST)
> From: Jim Cassata <jim@web-ex.com>
> To: nocol-users@navya.com
> Subject: Re: [nocol-users] multiple ippingmon programs
>
>
> > Bill Hauck wrote:
> > >
> > > i've got a few questions that i haven't found in the archives or the doc's.
> > >
> > > 1. can ippingmon be run so that escalations happen differently for
> different equipment? (router and switches should be 5 min polls, servers
> should be 10 min polls.)
>
>
> I don't think you should be monitoring servers with ippingmon in the first
> place. We've all seen servers crash yet still reply to a ping. We use
> portmon to monitor the the various services the server is running and
> rpcmon to monitor our UNIX boxes.
The only problem with this ploy, of course, is that myself (along with
many other people) take great joy in shutting off RPC whenever possible.
So, yeah, portmon is a great "substitute" or workaround (after all,
we're really only concerned that particular services are responding at
reasonable levels more than anything else).
Along the same lines:
Anyone come up with an SSH monitor, perhaps? Yeah, portmon works
here but you can only tell that it's answering and that it's returning
the right identification string; but what happens if it's handoff to
login doesn't work right? Anyone take it that far (ie. no login
prompt) yet?
--
Russell M. Van Tassell Commercial Systems Corp.
russell@cscorp.com http://www.cscorp.com/
Ph: 1-888/COMM-SYS
|