RE: [SA-list] Problematic WAN checks

[Carter, Phillip]

Title: RE: [SA-list] Problematic WAN checks

I suppose in this instance, DOWN is no response at all. So should I just drop the successrate percentage, send more pings, increase the timeout, or what?

 

Thanks
Phillip Carter
Ph: +61 3 9235 1691

 

---

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
Sent: Thursday, 8 July 2004 5:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Problematic WAN checks

But what is DOWN for you?

You defined within SA that you expect a successrate of 50%, so it's notmal that a sucessrate of 25% gives a down.

 

 

Dirk.

 

---

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carter, Phillip
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 9:04 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Problematic WAN checks

Here's a real-life sequence. Cycles occur at 15 second intervals with different checks happening every 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th cycle. If a DOWN is recorded the priority is ignored. So, given this sequence, what are the best settings to use so I don't get an alert, yet I DO get an alert if it's really down???

1st Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:40:49 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping failed due to a successrate of only 25%
2nd Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:41:33 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping failed due to a successrate of only 25%
3rd Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:43:15 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping OK with a successrate of 75% and an average roundtriptime of 696ms
4th Cycle - No Check
5th Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:45:08 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping OK with a successrate of 50% and an average roundtriptime of 961ms
6th Cycle - No Check
7th Cycle - No Check
8th Cycle - No Check
9th Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:47:57 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping failed due to a successrate of only 25%
10th Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:48:37 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping OK with a successrate of 100% and an average roundtriptime of 516ms

11th Cycle - No Check
12th Cycle - 8/07/2004 2:50:22 PM GEELONG ROUTER Ping OK with a successrate of 50% and an average roundtriptime of 745ms

Also, was I right in saying that the way we have it setup, the timeout is 4 seconds per ping?

Thanks
Phillip Carter
Ph: +61 3 9235 1691

________________________________

        From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
        Sent: Thursday, 8 July 2004 4:31 PM
        To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
        Subject: RE: [SA-list] Problematic WAN checks
       
       
        And what does the logfile show for the false downs?
        
        It should only generate a down IF less then 50% of the frames get back within that given timeout.
        

        Dirk.
       

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER - THIS MAY AFFECT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS: Because this document has been prepared without consideration of any specific clients investment objectives, financial situation or needs, a Bell Potter Securities Limited investment adviser should be consulted before any investment decision is made. While this document is based on the information from sources which are considered reliable, Bell Potter Securities Limited, its directors, employees and consultants do not represent, warrant or guarantee, expressly or impliedly, that the information contained in this document is complete or accurate. Nor does Bell Potter Securities Limited accept any responsibility to inform you of any matter that subsequently comes to its notice, which may affect any of the information contained in this document.

This document is a private communication to clients and is not intended for public circulation or for the use of any third party, without the prior approval of Bell Potter Securities. Disclosure of Interest: Bell Potter Securities Limited receives commission from dealing in securities and its authorised representatives, or introducers of business, may directly share in this commission. Bell Potter Securities and its associates may hold shares in the companies recommended. Bell Potter Securities Limited ABN 25 006 390 772 AFS Licence No. 243480