Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
Andrew Li wrote: > Thanks for the patch, it applies cleanly to 3.0.6 stable. I've read > through it but have not yet tried using it. > Hiren has been in contact with Mark on it the last months, in Icinga it works just fine now. > I think it's a good enhancement because it makes the escalation path > more logical. > Yep we too - that is why it has been slightly adapted and will be in Icinga 1.0.2 Kind regards, Michael -- DI (FH) Michael Friedrich michael.friedr...@univie.ac.at Tel: +43 1 4277 14359 Vienna University Computer Center Universitaetsstrasse 7 A-1010 Vienna, Austria -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 03:25, Gius, Mark wrote: > I had submitted a patch a while back that allows for distinguishing > between warning and critical. I don't think it's going to be included > in any 3.0.X releases, because it apparently breaks plugins that access > Nagios' state data directly. I don't know whether or not my patch will > be included in 3.2.x or higher releases. I had a look at 3.2.1, doesn't look like it's the patch is included :( > You can grab my patch (which I'm applying to vanilla 3.0.6 Nagios sources) > out of this thread. At the time I wrote it, it also patched cleanly > against HEAD, but I haven't kept up with it. > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.nagios.devel/7083/ Thanks for the patch, it applies cleanly to 3.0.6 stable. I've read through it but have not yet tried using it. I think it's a good enhancement because it makes the escalation path more logical. Andrew -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
Erk, you're going to want this one, it includes directives for host states as well as unknown service states. It's got some docs in it as well, but the docs don't patch cleanly against 3.0.6. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.nagios.devel/7083 -Gius > -Original Message- > From: Gius, Mark > Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:25 AM > To: Nagios Users List > Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals > > I had submitted a patch a while back that allows for distinguishing > between warning and critical. I don't think it's going to be included > in any 3.0.X releases, because it apparently breaks plugins that access > Nagios' state data directly. I don't know whether or not my patch will > be included in 3.2.x or higher releases. > > You can grab my patch (which I'm applying to vanilla 3.0.6 Nagios > sources) out of this thread. At the time I wrote it, it also patched > cleanly against HEAD, but I haven't kept up with it. > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.nagios.devel/7083/ > > -Gius > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Lindsey [mailto:mike-nag...@5dninja.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 8:11 PM > > To: Nagios Users List > > Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals > > > > If it hasn't, I'll be adding it myself and will be happy to submit my > > patches back. I've been needing this functionality for awhile, and > was > > planning on rolling it in, in the next 2-3 months. > > > > Andrew Li wrote: > > > Does anyone know if the notification count problem got fixed in > > 3.2.1? > > > > > > I had a read of the ChangeLog but it doesn't mention anything > related > > to > > > this problem since 3.0.6. > > > > > > -- > > Mike Lindsey > > > > - > -- > > --- > > ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate > > GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the > > lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo > > ___ > > Nagios-users mailing list > > Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users > > ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when > > reporting any issue. > > ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to > /dev/null > > --- > --- > ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate > GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the > lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo > ___ > Nagios-users mailing list > Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users > ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when > reporting any issue. > ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
I had submitted a patch a while back that allows for distinguishing between warning and critical. I don't think it's going to be included in any 3.0.X releases, because it apparently breaks plugins that access Nagios' state data directly. I don't know whether or not my patch will be included in 3.2.x or higher releases. You can grab my patch (which I'm applying to vanilla 3.0.6 Nagios sources) out of this thread. At the time I wrote it, it also patched cleanly against HEAD, but I haven't kept up with it. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.nagios.devel/7083/ -Gius > -Original Message- > From: Mike Lindsey [mailto:mike-nag...@5dninja.net] > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 8:11 PM > To: Nagios Users List > Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals > > If it hasn't, I'll be adding it myself and will be happy to submit my > patches back. I've been needing this functionality for awhile, and was > planning on rolling it in, in the next 2-3 months. > > Andrew Li wrote: > > Does anyone know if the notification count problem got fixed in > 3.2.1? > > > > I had a read of the ChangeLog but it doesn't mention anything related > to > > this problem since 3.0.6. > > > -- > Mike Lindsey > > --- > --- > ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate > GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the > lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo > ___ > Nagios-users mailing list > Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users > ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when > reporting any issue. > ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
If it hasn't, I'll be adding it myself and will be happy to submit my patches back. I've been needing this functionality for awhile, and was planning on rolling it in, in the next 2-3 months. Andrew Li wrote: > Does anyone know if the notification count problem got fixed in 3.2.1? > > I had a read of the ChangeLog but it doesn't mention anything related to > this problem since 3.0.6. -- Mike Lindsey -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
Does anyone know if the notification count problem got fixed in 3.2.1? I had a read of the ChangeLog but it doesn't mention anything related to this problem since 3.0.6. Cheers, Andrew On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 08:55, Neil Ramsay wrote: > Hi Martin, > > The escalation_options don't take the state into consideration during > the notification count. So if you have an escalate rule on the 4th > notification and only escalate on Critical in the escalation_options > then following scenario is can occur: > You have 3 warning notifications and the 4th is Critical then it will > escalate as there have been 4 notifications and a Critical. I posted a > help request on this issue a week or two ago and would really like > this to be patched or built into the next update. > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.nagios.user/64997/match=escalation+state > > Cheers, > > Neil > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Martin Melin > wrote: > The existing escalation_options directive in escalation > definitions will likely get you this behavior without the need > for a patch. > > http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/3_0/escalations.html - see > the very bottom of this page as well as the object definition > documentation for escalation_options. > > Regards, > Martin Melin > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:49 AM, Mark Gius > wrote: > Currently, service notifications contain > "first/last_notification" > directives, that specify the range of notifications > that the escalation > should apply to. This method of escalation has a > weakness however. > > At my work, we let warnings go to the default contact > (which happens to > be email), and escalate to a pager chain on critical. > However, if a > service sits in WARNING for a length of time (which is > likely to happen > in the middle of the night), by the time the service > enters a CRITICAL > state the notification count exceeds our highest > escalation, and our > entire team gets paged immediately. > > What I'd like to see is the ability to distinguish > between a WARNING > notification and a CRITICAL notification in the > escalation, and set up > escalation chains that work based on the number of > CRITICAL's that have > been sent, as opposed to the total number of > notifications. > > I am planning on patching nagios to support this > behavior if there isn't > a way to achieve this behavior with the current > implementation. My plan > is to add a warning/critical count to service, add a > first/last > warning/critical state to service escalations, and add > the directives > "(first|last)_(warning|critical)_notification" to the > service escalation > configs. The idea is also to keep the current > behavior > (notification_count and first/last_notification would > still be present), > but allow finer grained control over when escalations > are sent out. > This way if somebody didn't want to use the finer > grained control their > behavior would stay the same. My current plan is to > match the > escalation if _any_ of the 3 notification ranges match > (all/warning/critical). > > Any advice on making this behavior happen with Nagios > as-is, or > suggestions/advice on the implementation are welcome. > > -Gius > -- ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
Re: [Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
Hi Martin, The escalation_options don't take the state into consideration during the notification count. So if you have an escalate rule on the 4th notification and only escalate on Critical in the escalation_options then following scenario is can occur: You have 3 warning notifications and the 4th is Critical then it will escalate as there have been 4 notifications and a Critical. I posted a help request on this issue a week or two ago and would really like this to be patched or built into the next update. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.nagios.user/64997/match=escalation+state Cheers, Neil On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Martin Melin wrote: > The existing escalation_options directive in escalation definitions will > likely get you this behavior without the need for a patch. > > http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/3_0/escalations.html - see the very > bottom of this page as well as the object definition documentation for > escalation_options. > > Regards, > Martin Melin > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:49 AM, Mark Gius wrote: > >> Currently, service notifications contain "first/last_notification" >> directives, that specify the range of notifications that the escalation >> should apply to. This method of escalation has a weakness however. >> >> At my work, we let warnings go to the default contact (which happens to >> be email), and escalate to a pager chain on critical. However, if a >> service sits in WARNING for a length of time (which is likely to happen >> in the middle of the night), by the time the service enters a CRITICAL >> state the notification count exceeds our highest escalation, and our >> entire team gets paged immediately. >> >> What I'd like to see is the ability to distinguish between a WARNING >> notification and a CRITICAL notification in the escalation, and set up >> escalation chains that work based on the number of CRITICAL's that have >> been sent, as opposed to the total number of notifications. >> >> I am planning on patching nagios to support this behavior if there isn't >> a way to achieve this behavior with the current implementation. My plan >> is to add a warning/critical count to service, add a first/last >> warning/critical state to service escalations, and add the directives >> "(first|last)_(warning|critical)_notification" to the service escalation >> configs. The idea is also to keep the current behavior >> (notification_count and first/last_notification would still be present), >> but allow finer grained control over when escalations are sent out. >> This way if somebody didn't want to use the finer grained control their >> behavior would stay the same. My current plan is to match the >> escalation if _any_ of the 3 notification ranges match >> (all/warning/critical). >> >> Any advice on making this behavior happen with Nagios as-is, or >> suggestions/advice on the implementation are welcome. >> >> -Gius >> >> >> -- >> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 >> 30-Day >> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus >> on >> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with >> Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july >> ___ >> Nagios-users mailing list >> Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users >> ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when >> reporting any issue. >> ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null >> > > > > -- > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus > on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > ___ > Nagios-users mailing list > Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users > ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when > reporting any issue. > ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null > -- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting i
[Nagios-users] Escalate after X warnings or criticals
Currently, service notifications contain "first/last_notification" directives, that specify the range of notifications that the escalation should apply to. This method of escalation has a weakness however. At my work, we let warnings go to the default contact (which happens to be email), and escalate to a pager chain on critical. However, if a service sits in WARNING for a length of time (which is likely to happen in the middle of the night), by the time the service enters a CRITICAL state the notification count exceeds our highest escalation, and our entire team gets paged immediately. What I'd like to see is the ability to distinguish between a WARNING notification and a CRITICAL notification in the escalation, and set up escalation chains that work based on the number of CRITICAL's that have been sent, as opposed to the total number of notifications. I am planning on patching nagios to support this behavior if there isn't a way to achieve this behavior with the current implementation. My plan is to add a warning/critical count to service, add a first/last warning/critical state to service escalations, and add the directives "(first|last)_(warning|critical)_notification" to the service escalation configs. The idea is also to keep the current behavior (notification_count and first/last_notification would still be present), but allow finer grained control over when escalations are sent out. This way if somebody didn't want to use the finer grained control their behavior would stay the same. My current plan is to match the escalation if _any_ of the 3 notification ranges match (all/warning/critical). Any advice on making this behavior happen with Nagios as-is, or suggestions/advice on the implementation are welcome. -Gius -- Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july ___ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
