05 PM
Posted To: Servers Alive mailing list
Conversation: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
Personally, I set several levels of alert, depending upon whom I want to
be alerted and when...but it can get very confusing if you try to set
too many ale
ked on EVERY up/down check...
Jonathan Marsden
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Jason Passow
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 1:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
That is how I have gotten around most
That is how I have gotten around most of the false error.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 12:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
Thanks for everyo
u're seeing...
dirk.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri Aug 15 7:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
Thanks for everyone's responses,
This does make sense,
ge-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 1:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
Thanks for everyone's responses,
This does make sense, and I was trying to think of a way
to get around it.
an Marsden
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 12:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies & alerts
Jesse,
I think I might know what happened...when a server shuts down, it shuts
down services and drives first, and the last thing that is terminated is
power to the motherboard, an
Jesse,
I think I might know what happened...when a server shuts down, it shuts down
services and drives first, and the last thing that is terminated is power to
the motherboard, and in most cases the NIC...I do believe that it is the NIC
that allows for the return of the ping. I know that I can g
You were in the middle of a check cycle when the server went down. This
happens to me occasionally as well. It had pinged the server (which is the
last service to go down upon shutdown by the way) and therefore continued to
check the rest of the services. What I find on one my servers is that th
Is it possible that the ping was successful while the power was still on,
then the power failed during the sub-checks?
---
Troy Bruder, Manager - Hosting and Microsoft Services
APT Information Technology Consultants
7540 Windsor Dr. STE 204
Allentown, PA 18195
Phone 610.366.1100 -or- 888.2.GET.
even beta) we're already thinking of a next release too.
dirk.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ahmed HassanSent: Tue Dec 17 3:46 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies
This is what I actually meant/want to d
.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ahmed
HassanSent: Tue Dec 17 3:46 PMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependencies
This is what I actually meant/want to do;
List:
A
B
C
D
E
Dependencies
f Ahmed HassanSent: Tue Dec 17 12:55 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies
Thanks Dirk - My enteries are in the following order;
1 - Host entries
FW_1 CheckFW_1-Dummy CheckFW_2 checkDMZ_host1 checkDMZ_host2 checkDMZ_host3 checkDMZ_host4 check 2- DependenciesDMZ_host1 depends
C
depends on A being UP
=>
NOT POSSIBLE!
dirk.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ahmed
HassanSent: Tue Dec 17 12:55 PMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependencies
Thanks Dirk -
TECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ahmed HassanSent: Mon Dec 16 10:58 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies
>I assume you have some checks for the FWs too?
Yes I do have a ping test for the FWs too.
>For the additional test you want to have you'll need o
make sure
you understand later why you made 2 identical entries).
dirk.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ahmed
HassanSent: Mon Dec 16 10:58 PMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependencies
>I
assume you h
>I assume you have some checks for the FWs too?
Yes I do have a ping test for the FWs too.
>For the additional test you want to have you'll need one FW dummy entry.
How do I create the FW dummy entry?
>BUT if you still want to check DMZ_hosts if FW_2 is down and FW_1 is up THEN you will have t
I
assume you have some checks for the FWs too?
For
the additional test you want to have you'll need one FW dummy
entry.
FW_1
check
FW_2
check
DMZ_hosts check
DMZ_hosts depends on FW_2 being UP
FW_2 depends on FW_1 being UP
BUT if
you s
EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, November 21,
2002 8:56 AMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: RE:
[SA-list] Dependencies
I think that is a good
idea but a bear to setup.
Also, what about redundant
paths.e.g. We have 2 core switches. Each core switch is
a
-Original Message-
From: Yem, Scott
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday,
November 21, 2002 11:18 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependencies
This also could be done
by setting the dependencies from your monitoring server out. Obviously,
a
3311 San Carlos, CA 94070 Direct
650-701-5318 Helpdesk
650-701-4411 FAX
650-701-4953
-Original Message-From: Jack Lyons
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, November 21,
2002 6:31 AMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: RE:
[SA-list] De
er 21, 2002 7:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependencies
Then ALL is ALL-entry...
That's not something
we're going to do...
dirk.
-Original
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Garry Clarke
Sent: T
Then
ALL is ALL-entry...
That's
not something we're going to do...
dirk.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Garry
ClarkeSent: Thu Nov 21 12:12 PMTo:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependenci
'ALL'
depend on single item (e.g. gateway ping)
-Original Message-From: Dirk Bulinckx
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: 21 November 2002 10:52To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SA-list]
Dependencies
How
you can depend on ALL?
dirk.
-Origin
How
you can depend on ALL?
dirk.
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Garry
ClarkeSent: Thu Nov 21 11:46 AMTo:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: [SA-list]
Dependencies
I have
60 items being monited at the moment. If the monit
Neither did I 'til I was woken up 3 times in one night!
-Original Message-
From: Dirk Bulinckx [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 31 July 2002 08:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] dependencies
Not suren I'm not seeing this as a real problem.
Dirk.
-Origin
Not suren I'm not seeing this as a real problem.
Dirk.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Mike Tree
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:29 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [SA-list] dependencies
So, will this
So, will this be sorted in v4?
-Original Message-
From: Dirk Bulinckx [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 30 July 2002 16:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] dependencies
normal.
the status change will send a mail when the entry's status changes (with
some exceptions)
en
your "case" we should keep 3 to be
able to say that before the unavailable it was down)
Dirk.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Mike Tree
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:44 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [SA-lis
L PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] dependencies
Not sure to understand the question correctly.
entry_2 depends on entry_1 being up.
entry_1 down -> mail
entry_2 not checked
entry_1 up -> mail again
entry_2 is checked and IF DOWN then you'll get a mail, if it's UP you
shou
Not sure to understand the question correctly.
entry_2 depends on entry_1 being up.
entry_1 down -> mail
entry_2 not checked
entry_1 up -> mail again
entry_2 is checked and IF DOWN then you'll get a mail, if it's UP you
shouldn't get the mail.
Dirk.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
-Original Message-
> From: gene Martinez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 5:15 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies
>
>
> Not 100% sure what your asking. With dependencies, I'd want
> the 4006's to
> be
Via the dependencies you won't be able to set it up without doing double
monitoring.
4006-A depends on 6500-A being UP
4006-B depends on 6500-A being UP
4006-A depends on 6500-B being UP
4006-B depends on 6500-B being UP
that way all checks are done but you could
What he means is if you monitor the link between switch A to Switch B or
do you monitor an application/host that can be gotten to from either of
your redundant links.
That is were the problem of monitoring a host or application with
redundant links, it is only down when both links are down. Whic
Not 100% sure what your asking. With dependencies, I'd want the 4006's to
be dependent on the 6500's being UP. But as the 4006's are split between
(2) 6500's, as it is now you have to select (1) or the other. Maybe this
could be an option for ver 4... :)
At 05:06 PM 7/15/02 -0400, you wrote:
>
are you monitoring the links or are you monitoring a host on the other end
of those two links.
> -Original Message-
> From: gene Martinez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 4:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SA-list] Dependencies
>
>
> I have another que
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SA-list] Dependencies.
I've asked this before, but I'll ask again.. I have 600+ devices setup to
be checked on a network... I have the users closet switches first, the
middles switches 2nd and the routers last. But what happens is if I need
From: "Morrison, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:40 PM
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies.
>
> I have put a number (or space) at the front of the pretty name and then
> sorted by the pretty name to get the che
-701-5318
Helpdesk650-701-4411
FAX 650-701-4953
-Original Message-
From: gene Martinez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Dependencies.
That's just it. I like the order they are in. It&#
the pretty name and then
>sorted by the pretty name to get the checks in the order that I like.
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: gene Martinez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Friday, 17 May 2002 07:36
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [SA-list] Dependencies
I have put a number (or space) at the front of the pretty name and then
sorted by the pretty name to get the checks in the order that I like.
-Original Message-
From: gene Martinez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 17 May 2002 07:36
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SA-list
I've asked this before, but I'll ask again.. I have 600+ devices setup to
be checked on a network... I have the users closet switches first, the
middles switches 2nd and the routers last. But what happens is if I need to
restart Salive, it takes many runs before it will start check the users
swi
41 matches
Mail list logo
