Warning for all!
Even though Nagios 2.x eventually compiled on my system, I ended up with a
defective check_ping. And since check_ping is used by Nagios to check whether a
host is up or not, this causes MAJOR problems...
See http://www.meulie.net/forum_viewtopic.php?21.4226 for more info on
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 09:04 +0100, Evert Meulie wrote:
Warning for all!
Even though Nagios 2.x eventually compiled on my system, I ended up with a
defective check_ping. And since check_ping is used by Nagios to check whether
a host is up or not, this causes MAJOR problems...
For ping you
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 09:04:18AM +0100, Evert Meulie wrote:
Warning for all!
Even though Nagios 2.x eventually compiled on my system, I ended up
with a defective check_ping. And since check_ping is used by Nagios to
check whether a host is up or not, this causes MAJOR problems...
what
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 10:06:59AM +0100, Dennis Roos wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 09:04 +0100, Evert Meulie wrote:
Warning for all!
Even though Nagios 2.x eventually compiled on my system, I ended up
with a defective check_ping. And since check_ping is used by Nagios
to check whether
on 2.x kernels, the raw_icmp capability replaces the
insecure CAP_NET_RAW. raw_icmp is given by default
on mainline util-vserver since (at least) 0.30.208
(and we now have 0.30.209)
What I did to get it to work was:
* Add CAP_NET_RAW to the capabilities of the vserver (in /etc/vservers)
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 10:25 -0600, Matthew Nuzum wrote:
on 2.x kernels, the raw_icmp capability replaces the
insecure CAP_NET_RAW. raw_icmp is given by default
on mainline util-vserver since (at least) 0.30.208
(and we now have 0.30.209)
What I did to get it to work was:
* Add
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 05:49:06PM +0100, Dennis Roos wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 10:25 -0600, Matthew Nuzum wrote:
on 2.x kernels, the raw_icmp capability replaces the
insecure CAP_NET_RAW. raw_icmp is given by default
on mainline util-vserver since (at least) 0.30.208
(and we now
Yup, that was it! :-)
Are there any plans to make 127.0.0.1 existant in future versions of vserver?
Regards,
Evert
Oliver Welter wrote:
Hi,
I think that this problem is related to the nonexisting 127.0.0.1
address. If I remeber correctly than nagios try to ping this address and
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:03:40AM +0100, Evert Meulie wrote:
Yup, that was it! :-)
Are there any plans to make 127.0.0.1 existant in future versions of
vserver?
yes :)
Regards,
Evert
Oliver Welter wrote:
Hi,
I think that this problem is related to the nonexisting
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 13:04:50 +0100, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:03:40AM +0100, Evert Meulie wrote:
Yup, that was it! :-)
Are there any plans to make 127.0.0.1 existant in future versions of
vserver?
yes :)
Does this mean that binding to 127.0.0.1 is currently risky in
10 matches
Mail list logo
