ation.
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential, and
may be legally privileged. If you are not the int
.
Only real requirement is Nagios friendly.
Thanks,
Jeff
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential
Ought to be as simple as installing Nagios on your solaris box and
rsyncing over the config files, and make the few modifications to the
main config files.
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e-mail, including
I was under the impression that check_http has a regex option, meaning
you can pass it a regex that ought to be able to handle this.
Jeff
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e-mail, including attachments, is covered
I'm in the same boat, and would love some assistance as well.
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-252
Here at work, I use notify-by-epager, and then
@email.uscc.net to SMS our cingular phones.
Many people overlook the fact that many cell providers have a similar
setup.
Jeff
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T8IDEAS | F 888.290.4675
This e
,w,u
}
Looking at the documentation, though, this might not work
It appears that in this case the SSL Cert warnings will not go down if
ANY of the HTTP by NAMES are down Is this the case?
Any easy ways to accomplish this?
Thanks,
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.C
That was my first check, but I have this set to 0, as per "A value of 0
will not restrict the number of concurrent checks that are being
executed."
I am really stumped on this one.
JEFF CHAPIN
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR
T8DESIGN.COM | P 319.266.7574 - x267 | 877.T
, and let the once-per-day checks fill in
as needed, rather than hammer out all at once.
Any advice as to how to achieve this?
- Jeff Chapin (chapinj)
---
The mailing list archive is found here:
http://www.nagiosexchange.org/nagios-users.34.0.html
