On 29/07/2014 16:25, Martin Møller Skarbiniks Pedersen wrote: > Very few uses Nagios and fewer each year. Some of them who uses nagios > talks about moving away from it. > And a lot uses Zabbix. Maybe the Zabbix/Nagios ratio are 5:1 currently > for my students. >
That matches what I see out in the general world at large. The majority find that nagios does not suit their needs - mostly due to limitations in nagios - and when upgrade time comes along they switch to a nagios fork (or something else). Nagios considers itself the centre of the universe, which I suppose is fine if your network consists of one subnet in-house. Very few real-life scenarios match that simplistic model. Hence why people migrate away to something that maps better to real life. However, nagios is still mostly representative of monitoring at large and especially of it's forks. Knowledge of nagios still maps well to what LPI does and how it does it - anyone who can demonstrate working knowledge of nagios can be assumed to be able to drive other similar products in short order. As such, it still fits the purpose. I don't see anything much to be gained from changing that objective. We aren't in the game of showing that the candidate can take a known product in a known environment, and apply specific steps to achieve a defined result. That's practical testing, Red Hat pays there. -- Alan McKinnon [email protected] _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
