Fwd: Distributed checking

[Jason Burnett]

I am still having this issue. I want it to perform the freshness check
because I need to know if it is not getting the results from the passive
server, so I set freshness threshold to 500, just to get it out there.
Now, my passive server sends the results, the primary shows green, then
goes red and in the log on the primary server I can see where it is
trying to test the server itself. my check interval on teh passive
server is set to 1. Any other suggestions? Does anyone have this working
successfully? Which version of nagios? What is your freshness interval
setting? I am an the edge of getting this implemented as our new
production monitoring system, I just have to get this issue ironed out.

on Thu Feb 06 Andrew Meredith spoke forth with the blessed manuscript
> This is the same problem I described under:

>   Subject: Distributed Checks
>   Date:    2003-02-04 1512

> In that mail I confirm that if you were to do this, then the server 
> would indeed stop performing active checks .. which is what I want, as 
> the central server cannot successfully perform the checks from it's IP 
> address.

> However, it doesn't then do anything else either.

> I was expecting it to mark the service as unknown or down or somethng, 
> it just keeps on displaying the last service status that it received.

> Andy M

> Atul Gosain wrote:
> >Hi
> >
> >The problem is simple.
> >U have check_freshness variable set to 1. The effect of this is that 
> >whenever the passive service results does not reach nagios for some time 
> >(freshness_threshold ), it considers the result as stale and starts 
> >checking actively for that service. If u want that active checks are not 
> >executed when passive results are stale, then disable check_freshness 
> >variable.
> >Just tell me in case ur problem is solved.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Atul
> >
> >Jasmine wrote:
> >
> >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >>HI all.. i m still having this problem sorry. i thought i made a 
> >>config mistake, but that does not solve the problem.
> >> 
> >>
> >>>>just a note that I am having about the same problem as you. Anyone has
> >>>>any ideas?
> >>>>
> >>>>On Wednesday 05 February 2003 19:01, Jason Burnett wrote:
> >>>>    
> >>>>
> >>>>>o.k. I am using the distributed method with passive checks to monitor
> >>>>>some hosts I have behind a firewall that I dont want to punch holes 
> >>>>>in.
> >>>>>For some reason my central nagios server keeps running active 
> >>>>>checks on
> >>>>>the hosts even though I have that disabled on a per service instance.
> >>>>>So I end up with the service up when it gets the info via the passive
> >>>>>tests then it goes critical when the central server tries to check it
> >>>>>with an active test. Here is the service config from the central
> >>>>>server:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>define service{
> >>>>>   host_name           pinky
> >>>>>   service_description     SSH
> >>>>>   check_command           check_ssh
> >>>>>   max_check_attempts      2
> >>>>>   normal_check_interval       5
> >>>>>   retry_check_interval        5
> >>>>>   passive_checks_enabled      1
> >>>>>   active_checks_enabled       0
> >>>>>   check_period            24x7
> >>>>>   flap_detection_enabled      1
> >>>>>   process_perf_data       1
> >>>>>   retain_status_information   1
> >>>>>   retain_nonstatus_information    1
> >>>>>   notification_interval       1
> >>>>>   notification_period     24x7
> >>>>>   notification_options        w,u,c,r
> >>>>>   notifications_enabled       1
> >>>>>   check_freshness         1
> >>>>>   freshness_threshold     180
> >>>>>   contact_groups          admins
> >>>>>}
> >>>>>      





> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
> SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
> http://www.vasoftware.com
> _______________________________________________
> Nagios-users mailing list
> Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com