Bulk changes fail silently if config files can't be verified

[dflick]

My bulk changes were not working even though you could run through the change and apply successfully. I found that if I wrote the config files and clicked verify, the verify failed. I was able to fix that problem and once that was fixed, bulk changes worked again. Specifically, a contact did not have host and service commands assigned. I tried a bulk change to turn off notifications for a few services which seems to work fine (no errors) but it did not take. Once I could load and verify the files successfully, bulk changes worked.

I would think that bulk changes should fail if it was not able to verify.

[bbahn]

Hello dflick,

What version of Nagios XI were you using? There have been a number of issues with the bulk modification tools that have been solved in recent versions of XI. If this is on a recent version post the fixes, I can create an issue for you to get this solved.

[dflick]

5.11.2

[kg2857]

Templates, hostgroups and generic services should typically be used so that for example only one check_cpu service should be defined (for an OS type). Using the wizards to define multiple again as an example check_cpu services will make for an unmanageable system.
This may not be what's happening, but the need for the use of bulk changes suggests that it is.

[dflick]

We are managing routers and the checks are for physical interfaces with circuit IDs. The checks must return the circuit ID or the monitoring team won't be able to distinguish which device to submit the ticket. I have found no way to generalize that unfortunately. A typical device looks like this:
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/0 LAN Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/0 LAN Status
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/1 crossover to router 2 Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/1 crossover to router 2 Status
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/2 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/2 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Status
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/2.50 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 GigabitEthernet0/0/2.50 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Status
CaldwellR1 Ping
CaldwellR1 Tunnel10000 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 Tunnel10000 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Status
CaldwellR1 Tunnel20000 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 Tunnel20000 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Status
CaldwellR1 Tunnel30000 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Bandwidth
CaldwellR1 Tunnel30000 ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI Status

The circuit IDs are critical. I see how I may be able to have a single check for all of the tunnels since they are all working over the same circuit and physical interface but I guess I don't understand how one check can do that. Any ideas?

[dflick]

Also, I have tried BPI but if I ever needed to make a change, the whole BPI config would be wiped and I would need to start from scratch so that was not supportable. If that issue has been fixed, that may be an option.

[jmichaelson]

@dflick, is it safe to assume that, e.g., "ATT AVPN MMEC.875560..ATI" is the circuit name? So that you've got [router][interface][circuit name] for your Nagios XI services that you're monitoring? How exactly are those configured in XI where using templates isn't working out for them?

[dflick]

I am not sure how to answer your question but here is the process:
We use the configuration router/switch wizard to discover the device and then we remove anything that is not needed in the discovery so we are left with [router][interface][circuit name] for each physical and logical interface.

I am not sure I am following how to do it a different way. Is there a document or example you could provide? We are pretty sharp with the systems but have not ventured into discovering or entering devices in any other way. I was told many years ago that the way we are doing it is the only supported way to get alerts on specific interface connections when each router has a different circuit ID on each interface (except for tunnels which do have the same description as their base interface)

I get how a single memory check can be consistent across many servers but with routers having different snmp IDs even when the hardware is configured identically and for those interfaces to have different descriptions, I am not sure how I could accomplish what we need.

I would LOVE to simplify if I could.

[kg2857]

Sorry, I didn't know the OP was checking on network gear...

[dflick]

Sorry, I didn't know the OP was checking on network gear...

No worries! I have been trying to figure out a way to implement templates but have not come up with anything yet. Thanks!