Another quick escalation question

[BanditBBS]

Looking here: http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/3_0/ ... escalation

If I create a service escalation like this:

Code: Select all

define serviceescalation{
        hostgroup_name  network_oncall
        contact_groups  network_oncall_pri
        first_notification   1
        last_notification   0
        notification_interval   15
        }

Will that do all services associated with all hosts in that hostgroup, or do I have to put in a service and/or service group as well?

[slansing]

In my understanding you need to define both as they are handled separately within Nagios:

http://assets.nagios.com/downloads/nagi ... ations.pdf

There is also a wizard available for escalations under CCM > Tools > Escalation Wizard, if that helps

[BanditBBS]

In my understanding you need to define both as they are handled separately within Nagios:

http://assets.nagios.com/downloads/nagi ... ations.pdf

There is also a wizard available for escalations under CCM > Tools > Escalation Wizard, if that helps

Yes, you have to create both. I know that. I have host escalations created and they are working fine. I am just concerned with service escalations right now and refer back to my opening post question.

I can not use the wizard, I have to create this in a static config due to on-call rotation handling.

can anyone answer my original question? In the service esclation, if I define a hostgroup and not any specific service, will the service escalation be tied to all services under the hosts in that hostgroup?

[slansing]

Yes I most certainly can.. You can define hostgroups in your service escalation and in doing so it will create a definition for the service you list under the service_description section of your configuration, under all of the hosts in the group.

Following this rule you must declare a service name, or the escalation will fail. And of course all of the hosts/hostgroups must have that service within them.

[BanditBBS]

Yes I most certainly can.. You can define hostgroups in your service escalation and in doing so it will create a definition for the service you list under the service_description section of your configuration, under all of the hosts in the group.

Following this rule you must declare a service name, or the escalation will fail. And of course all of the hosts/hostgroups must have that service within them.

I found this URL: http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/3_0/ ... escalation

it mentions I can use a wildcard in the service_description. When I try that, it fails. Any hints?

[BanditBBS]

It looks like the service_description wildcard only works if you use the host_name field and not the hostgroup field.....hmmmm

[slansing]

I recall that Mike G was working on trying to get this sorted out sometime during the last incremental release, I'm not sure how far he got though. I believe the wildcard was only working with hosts rather than services, I'll do some digging and we will get back to you on this.

[slansing]

Quick update since I'm hoping you are tracking this thread. Using wildcards in escalations will not work, because of the rule that the service's must be present in the host's/hostgroup's defined in the configuration, if one of the services is not, it will break.

[BanditBBS]

I figured it out. I added a dummy service to all the hosts in the hostgroup I wanted to use. Some of the hosts had no services and that was making the wildcard error out. Would be nice if it worked without that issue though.

[BanditBBS]

Quick update since I'm hoping you are tracking this thread. Using wildcards in escalations will not work, because of the rule that the service's must be present in the host's/hostgroup's defined in the configuration, if one of the services is not, it will break.

I consider that a bug, not a rule That just means if someone wants to use a wildcard, they either have to add a dummy service to all hosts or not use the hostgroup_name directive in the serviceescalation. I would think Nagios would check and then just skip that host. Would be much more intuitive that way(imo).