Somewhere along the way, I've picked up the idea that Nagios is service-oriented by nature, and that you shouldn't just define a host to be checked, but define at least one service to be checked.
In one situation, we have a lot of dumb devices we want to make sure are still alive, but no need to install any Nagios client on them. I'm thinking of one service check via check_ping. I believe this service check would just duplicate the ping that the host check is already doing, but is it a good idea to do it anyway?
Thanks...Lyle
simple check: is remote host alive?
-
scottwilkerson
- DevOps Engineer
- Posts: 19396
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:11 pm
- Location: Nagios Enterprises
- Contact:
Re: simple check: is remote host alive?
This depends.
Not all host check are ping. For example, if you run our website wizard, the host check is an HTTP check. In this case if you would also like to run a ping check it would be appropriate.
Not all host check are ping. For example, if you run our website wizard, the host check is an HTTP check. In this case if you would also like to run a ping check it would be appropriate.
Re: simple check: is remote host alive?
Good to know. Thanks.
Rephrasing the question: Is there anything wrong with just doing a host check, and no service check? I suppose a dead host might not show up if you only watched "Service Problems".
...Lyle
Rephrasing the question: Is there anything wrong with just doing a host check, and no service check? I suppose a dead host might not show up if you only watched "Service Problems".
...Lyle
-
scottwilkerson
- DevOps Engineer
- Posts: 19396
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:11 pm
- Location: Nagios Enterprises
- Contact:
Re: simple check: is remote host alive?
There is nothing wrong with just doing a host check.