Re: [Nagios-devel] a word against web interfaces

Support forum for Nagios Core, Nagios Plugins, NCPA, NRPE, NSCA, NDOUtils and more. Engage with the community of users including those using the open source solutions.
Locked
Guest

Re: [Nagios-devel] a word against web interfaces

Post by Guest »

I didn't think announcing a new GUI interface would have brought such
polar views out.

the reason I created a DB backend/GUI was:

we have 5-10 people who want to add monitors to different things,
without the gui, they would bug me about it.. now they don't. This is
what I like the most.

The gui has pages in there to do complex things. The trick is to make
the things you do often into a web-page, and automate it.. (have a
look at the application pages for examples of this)
Cut & Paste is just asking for problems in a fast changing environment.

We have batch jobs which integrate certain tables (like hosts &
hostgroups) from other places in our environment. So when we add a new
machine to the web server pool, or take a machine out of rotation I
don't have to touch the config, again less work for me.. We have new
machines being added every day. To do this with a text file would have
been much harder.

As for PHB's screwing things up.. let them, just make sure they know
(politely) that they did. A simple bounce shell script, which does a
config check before it restarts and bails if the config is invalid
will stop most mischef..
and if you hook that up with a CVS checkin/audit trail which points
the finger squarely at them they'll stop and think after a couple of
times, otherwise.. find a job where you can be appreciated!

The only problem I have with a db-based config is the lack of version
control, but that can be addressed easily.

but again.. let me remind the people on the list, that a DB-based
config is optional. while some people might not see the need, and will
not use it, respect the wishes of the people who want it.


ps.. given a choice between giving a PHB ssh access and a web-based
form I choose web-based anyday!

--Ian


On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:33:11 -0500, jeff vier
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 10:26 +0100, Ben Clewett wrote:
> > > web configuration is obviously evil.
> > Why 'obviously'? Web configuration is ideally suited to alterations:
> > - Easy to use.
>
> I beg to differ. I found them to all be a major PITA if I tried to do
> anything at all elaborate/complex.
>
> > - Can be used where ftp/telnet access is not possible.
>
> If you're letting web traffic in, why wouldn't you let SSH traffic in?
> I, for one, would never let a critical box (like my Nagios servers) have
> external incoming web access (and, for that matter, *direct* ssh
> access).
>
> > - Does not require a restart to nagios.
>
> What? Of course it does. Slapping some random web interface on it
> doesn't change its internal functionality.
>
> > - Does not require in depth training about format/layout.
> > - On-screen help ensures a flatter learning curve.
>
> As much as Nagios isn't simple, it's not rocket science, either. And
> once you have a few hosts set up, it's quite easy to copy off of
> existing entries. If THAT is too rough for the person trying to make
> changes/additions, perhaps you should reconsider allowing them to alter
> a mission-critical service.
>
> > - Can make use of CGI controls like CHECKBOX and SELECT to ensure less
> > chance of error.
>
> Not sure why you're labeling them as "CGI controls" when they're just
> basic HTML elements, nonetheless I don't think I've ever run into this
> where I felt like if I had a GUI on the front end of the configuration
> process it would have been avoided. If I skipped something, it's
> because I didn't know the person requesting the addition had intended me
> to watch the thing that I skipped. I would have skipped it either way,
> and they still would have looked at the Nagios screen and said "Hey,
> could you turn on XXX, too?"
>
> > - A good security model using HTML authentication.
>
> More secure than...what? FTP and telnet from the outside? yes. SSH,
> no way.
>
> > I cannot see web configuration as 'obviously' evil, and I would be very
> > interested to know why you feel this way.
> >
> > I believe this is a huge gain for nagios and will ensure greater
> > acceptance and far less support requests, as well as a far more
> > pr

...[email truncated]...


This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]
Locked