Ah, now I understand (and in fact now I remember you said that ages ago). Ironically that's less useful to me, although I could still use it behind our DMZ.
Ian _________________________________ Ian K Gray OEL IS - European Infrastructure Support Tel: +44 1236 502661 Mob: +44 7881 518854 "Dirk Bulinckx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> 01/02/2007 09:35 Please respond to Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> To Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> cc Subject RE: [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) The initial idea behind the agent was accesing system that are well protected. For examples checking system that are in a DMZ, were you can have access to the system over ONE port and not several (what is needed if you want to use Netbios like for the service/process/diskspace checks). Dirk Bulinckx. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:26 AM To: Servers Alive Discussion List Subject: RE: [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) Well, yes, that's what we do at the moment. But the point of the agent is surely to minimise the number of checks that have to run across the WAN, replacing them with a single local agent. Am I missing the point somewhere? (Entirely possible - it's early in the day and I had a late night...) Ian _________________________________ Ian K Gray OEL IS - European Infrastructure Support Tel: +44 1236 502661 Mob: +44 7881 518854 "Dirk Bulinckx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> 01/02/2007 09:15 Please respond to Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> To Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> cc Subject RE: [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) and can't you access that remote service using the snmp protocol? Dirk Bulinckx. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:56 AM To: Servers Alive Discussion List Subject: RE: [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) OK, I can live without database. However the more I consider it, the more I realise that SNMP checking is really important. To explain: our typical scenario is that we have servers in our European sites which are connected to a standalone UPS, linked for management via a USB or serial lead. The only way of monitoring those UPSs (other than using APC Enterprise Manager) is via SNMP to the APC agent on the server. Thus one of my critical checks to a remote server is to see what the status of the UPS is. Ian _________________________________ Ian K Gray OEL IS - European Infrastructure Support Tel: +44 1236 502661 Mob: +44 7881 518854 "Dirk Bulinckx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> 01/02/2007 08:45 Please respond to Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> To Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> cc Subject RE: [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) The agents will not have all checks that Servers Alive has. The agent will be a subset. The current win32 agent (no not yet in beta), does diskspace, process and service checks. The agent is basicly only needed whne you have restricted network access to a remote system/site. Dirk Bulinckx. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:26 AM To: Servers Alive Discussion List Subject: Re: [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) Win32 is actually the critical one for us. (Is that agent available? Are you looking for beta testers, Dirk?) I'd want it to do all the existing Windows checks - process, service, perfmon, diskspace, plus database stuff. Ideally it would do SNMP too - to check for example a non-networked UPS connected to the server. Pricing - bearing in mind SA's pricing levels, I'd agree with Kevin's US$10 - 25. I'm not sure about not having a site (or even enterprise) licence though. If I was spending $299 on a monitoring app, but then 5 or 10 times that on a limited number of agents for it, it wouldn't make much sense to me. (Don't get me wrong - I know $299 is dirt cheap - it's the relative pricing levels of main app to agent that I'm considering here). My initial instinct is to have an enterprise licence for around US $1000 - $2000. (To clarify - when I refer to "enterprise" I don't mean the Enterprise version of SA. I mean a licence to use unlimited agents throughout your enterprise. Half of our monitoring is done outwith our site, and it's those remote ones that would most benefit from an agent.) Ian _________________________________ Ian K Gray OEL IS - European Infrastructure Support Tel: +44 1236 502661 Mob: +44 7881 518854 "Dirk Bulinckx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> 31/01/2007 16:16 Please respond to Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> To Servers Alive Discussion List <salive@woodstone.nu> cc Subject [SA-list] Agent based check (what OS should we support?) We already talked about this several times on the list, so you all know by now that we're working on an agent based check too. The first dev has been done on the Win32. The next agent that we want to create is on another OS, probably some kind of *NIX variant. But we do have some questions about it, and that's were you can help me :-) * for what OS should we create an agent (and that you would use :-)) * what kind of checks should that agent do What would you see as a acceptable price for the usage of an agent. (to be more correct, the agents as such would be free of charge, it's using them within SA that would have a cost. The standard edition of SA will not be able to use the agents, the enterprise edition will be able to use the agents. A "normal" enterprise license will be able to access 2 remote agents (whatever OS they run), if you want to access more then 2 remote agents, then you will have to add "licenses" to SA for it. It's about that type of license cost that I'm seeking some feedback). Dirk Bulinckx. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list.
