headers
Wouter Prins | 7 Feb 2006 12:29
Picon

differentation between two hosts

Hello list,

I'm looking for a way to receive an alert in case of the following problem:

in case of remote locations i am monitoring the router and a firewall that is behind this router, both hosts
are added.
What i want to do now is when pings to the firewall are higher then the router itself is to receive an alert by
email of snmp trap. I have checked out the matchers that are available but they only point to one single host.

The reason i would like to have this is to have an alert in case of possible duplex problems on the firewall or a
mismatch and no ping loss is there, (just high pings).

Would love to hear it.

Regards,

Wouter Prins

--

-- 

Celebrate Hannibal Day this year.  Take an elephant to lunch.
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Tobias Oetiker | 7 Feb 2006 14:15
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: differentation between two hosts

Hi Wouter,

matchers that access two targets are not yet implemented, but
everything is possible ... if you need hints for coding this let me
know, if you want to sponsor the development such a feature, let me know too.

cheers
tobi
Today Wouter Prins wrote:

> Hello list,
>
> I'm looking for a way to receive an alert in case of the following problem:
>
> in case of remote locations i am monitoring the router and a firewall that is behind this router, both hosts
are added.
> What i want to do now is when pings to the firewall are higher then the router itself is to receive an alert by
email of snmp trap. I have checked out the matchers that are available but they only point to one single host.
>
> The reason i would like to have this is to have an alert in case of possible duplex problems on the firewall or
a mismatch and no ping loss is there, (just high pings).
>
> Would love to hear it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Wouter Prins
>
>
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jeff Williams | 7 Feb 2006 15:29
Picon

many ip addresses, short amount of time

Hello list,

I am using smokeping 2.0.5 and probing 6749 ip addresses using FPing.
I would like for each round of polling to complete in 10 minutes. Most
of the time it does, but sometimes it does not. I get quite a few
messages per day that say "FPing: WARNING: smokeping took 663 seconds
to complete 1 round of polling. It should complete polling in 600
seconds. You may have unresponsive devices in your setup." Sometimes
it takes longer than that if we are having network issues at the time.

I can provide the essential parts of my config file if necessary. I am
using a step of 600 and 5 pings. For graphs, I am displaying last
hour, last 3 hours, last 24 hours, last 7 days, last 30 days, and last
year. I am using a packetsize of 100, a mininterval of .001, and a
hostinterval of 0.1 with the FPing probe.

Being that I am very new to smokeping and relatively new to rrd, I
probably made some errors in my config that are leading to inefficient
check times.

Is smokeping designed to handle this many ip addresses in one
instance? Or am I doing something wrong in my config file?

Thanks.

Jeff
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Dez Cadena | 7 Feb 2006 15:57
Picon

Re: many ip addresses, short amount of time

Jeff Williams wrote:

>Is smokeping designed to handle this many ip addresses in one
>instance? Or am I doing something wrong in my config file?
>
>Thanks.
>  
>
You could also check a recent thread on this list with Subject: 
SmokePing Capacity For Large Scale Deployment...
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jeff Williams | 7 Feb 2006 16:47
Picon

Re: many ip addresses, short amount of time

That thread tells me that I/O is a limiting factor certainly (probably the
reason that the system feels so slow), but I'm curious if I have something
in my config file that could be optimized. Maybe I should do something with
the RRD definition? While I'm asking, is there a way to set smokeping so
that if it doesn't finish in time, it just assumes that last value it had
was valid? I know you can set that in RRD, but how do I define that in
smokeping? Thanks.
Jeff

On 2/7/06, Dez Cadena <dez <at> otenet.gr> wrote:
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> >Is smokeping designed to handle this many ip addresses in one
> >instance? Or am I doing something wrong in my config file?
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >
> You could also check a recent thread on this list with Subject:
> SmokePing Capacity For Large Scale Deployment...
>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
d.martineau | 7 Feb 2006 18:01
Picon

Smokeping Install problem !!!

Hi,
I'm french. I would like to install smokeping but when i launch smokeping 
"./smokeping", I've this error :

[root <at> cacti bin]# ./smokeping
Can't load 
'/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/RRDs/RRDs.so' 
for module RRDs: librrd.so.2: Ne peut ouvrir le fichier d'objet partagé: 
Aucun fichier ou répertoire de ce type at 
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi/DynaLoader.pm line 230.
 at /home/download/Smokeping/smokeping/lib/Smokeping.pm line 13
Compilation failed in require at 
/home/download/Smokeping/smokeping/lib/Smokeping.pm line 13.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at 
/home/download/Smokeping/smokeping/lib/Smokeping.pm line 13.
Compilation failed in require at ./smokeping line 7.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at ./smokeping line 7.

[root <at> cacti bin]# find / -name RRDs.so
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/RRDs/RRDs.so

file smokeping :
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
# -*-perl-*-

use lib qw(/usr/local/rrdtool-1.2.10/lib);
use lib qw(/home/download/Smokeping/smokeping/lib);

use Smokeping 2.000005;
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Wouter Prins | 7 Feb 2006 18:46
Picon

Re: differentation between two hosts

Hello Tobias,

I currently dont have time for this. :>
Maybe something to put on the TODO list, i think it would be a nice feat.

Regards,

Wouter

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 02:15:22PM +0100, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
> Hi Wouter,
> 
> matchers that access two targets are not yet implemented, but
> everything is possible ... if you need hints for coding this let me
> know, if you want to sponsor the development such a feature, let me know too.
> 
> cheers
> tobi
> Today Wouter Prins wrote:
> 
> > Hello list,
> >
> > I'm looking for a way to receive an alert in case of the following problem:
> >
> > in case of remote locations i am monitoring the router and a firewall that is behind this router, both
hosts are added.
> > What i want to do now is when pings to the firewall are higher then the router itself is to receive an alert by
email of snmp trap. I have checked out the matchers that are available but they only point to one single host.
> >
> > The reason i would like to have this is to have an alert in case of possible duplex problems on the firewall
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Niko Tyni | 7 Feb 2006 20:02
Picon
Picon

Re: many ip addresses, short amount of time

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 08:29:01AM -0600, Jeff Williams wrote:

> I am using smokeping 2.0.5 and probing 6749 ip addresses using FPing.
> I would like for each round of polling to complete in 10 minutes. Most
> of the time it does, but sometimes it does not. I get quite a few
> messages per day that say "FPing: WARNING: smokeping took 663 seconds
> to complete 1 round of polling. It should complete polling in 600
> seconds. You may have unresponsive devices in your setup." Sometimes
> it takes longer than that if we are having network issues at the time.
> 
> I can provide the essential parts of my config file if necessary. I am
> using a step of 600 and 5 pings. For graphs, I am displaying last
> hour, last 3 hours, last 24 hours, last 7 days, last 30 days, and last
> year. I am using a packetsize of 100, a mininterval of .001, and a
> hostinterval of 0.1 with the FPing probe.

Hi,

6749 targets is a lot. Have a look at 

http://lists.ee.ethz.ch/smokeping-users/msg01728.html

It basically says that the measurement time is around 20 milliseconds /
host / ping, which seems apply to your situation as well. I don't think
reducing mininterval below DEFAULT_SELECT_TIMEOUT compiled into fping (10
milliseconds by default) helps anything. I don't know how small timeouts
select(2) can handle, but you could try lowering DEFAULT_SELECT_TIMEOUT
and recompile.

The other recommendations in the above link apply as well: consider
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
d.martineau | 8 Feb 2006 10:15
Picon

RE Smokeping Install problem !!!

Hi,
I know why i've a problem !!!

When i install rrdtool 1.0.49, it make a directory perl in rrdtool/lib/
and so, smokeking runs correctly !!! 
But when i install rrdtool 1.2.12, there isn't this directory (the same 
whith vesrion 1.2.10) and i've the above error.

Why I don't have this directory ?? It's normal in the new version or it's 
on my server ???

regards.

David MARTINEAU
IMA
Ingénieur Réseaux
Département Système d'Information
Service Infrastructure
d.martineau <at> ima.tm.fr
05.49.34.74.27

d.martineau <at> ima.tm.fr 
Envoyé par : smokeping-users-bounce <at> list.ee.ethz.ch
07/02/2006 18:01

A
smokeping-users <at> list.ee.ethz.ch
cc

Objet
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Dez Cadena | 8 Feb 2006 13:38
Picon

Re: RE Smokeping Install problem !!!

d.martineau <at> ima.tm.fr wrote:

>[root <at> cacti bin]# ./smokeping
>Can't load 
>'/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/RRDs/RRDs.so' 
>  
>
You probably just need to re-compile rrdtool 1.2.x and include 
"--enable-perl-site-install" in your "./configure" command line
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane