Escalated alerts - necessary ?

[Henrik Stoerner <henrik (at) hswn.dk>]

I changed the subject, because this is a somewhat different issue that
the rest of the mail Brent wrote:


On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:39:52AM -0500, brent.mccrackin (at) bell.ca wrote:

> A feature I'd like to see is the ability to allow an identified
> acknowledge of an alert based on the two-digit code, that stops alerts
> for all recipients except escalation recipients (those being the people
> that need to be alerted if a downed service is not fixed after a
> specific time period regardless of someone working on it).  This would
> do away with the need for a '99' acknowledge to stop alerts for
> everyone, and let the person responding to the alert work on fixing it
> faster (at least until the escalation person starts asking for status
> reports).


Hobbit does not have the concept of "escalating" an alert that BB
has.

I didn't fully understand what the BB's idea of "escalating" an alert
meant, until I read Brent's message. I see that it could be useful,
but also that it will be somewhat tricky to implement with the current
design of Hobbit's alert-module.

So - how much do you use it ? Do you need to have alerts going out for
problems that have been acknowledged ?


Regards,
Henrik