Re: [Nagios-devel] Why distinguish hosts from services?
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:48 am
On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 14:17 +0200, Holger Weiss wrote:
> Note that I don't doubt the usefulness of syntactic configuration sugar=
,
> such as the implicit service->host dependencies or the nice and simple
> way of mapping the network topology using the "parents" directive. The
> thing I don't really understand is why Nagios distinguishes hosts from
> services internally (outside the configuration parser). However, I may
> well be overlooking something, so I figured I'd ask what it is
=EF=BB=BF
I think some stripped down host configuration should be kept. sth like
define host {
host_name foo
address 127.0.0.1
avail_service icmp_service
}
where icmp_service would be a common service
and would prevent some redundant config parser code I think.
But if you understood you correctly, you are asking for internal rather
than configuration changes. This would mean having a "monitoring object"
rather than host or service structures, and automatically created object
dependencies (services still rely on the monitored "host").
Beside that, the states for hosts and services differ (hosts have an
unreachable state as well as state texts differ). With one monitoring
object, unreachable states would automatically be valid for services,
too.
Matthias
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]
> Note that I don't doubt the usefulness of syntactic configuration sugar=
,
> such as the implicit service->host dependencies or the nice and simple
> way of mapping the network topology using the "parents" directive. The
> thing I don't really understand is why Nagios distinguishes hosts from
> services internally (outside the configuration parser). However, I may
> well be overlooking something, so I figured I'd ask what it is
=EF=BB=BF
I think some stripped down host configuration should be kept. sth like
define host {
host_name foo
address 127.0.0.1
avail_service icmp_service
}
where icmp_service would be a common service
and would prevent some redundant config parser code I think.
But if you understood you correctly, you are asking for internal rather
than configuration changes. This would mean having a "monitoring object"
rather than host or service structures, and automatically created object
dependencies (services still rely on the monitored "host").
Beside that, the states for hosts and services differ (hosts have an
unreachable state as well as state texts differ). With one monitoring
object, unreachable states would automatically be valid for services,
too.
Matthias
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]