Re: [hobbit] contents check

["Josh Luthman" <josh (at) imaginenetworksllc.com>]

I would suggesting using http URLs for tests rather then port checking.
I've seen time and time again where the TCP would establish a socket but
never transport data on many many things.

On 12/17/07, Shah, Haresh K (GE, Corporate, consultant) <
haresh.k.shah (at) ge.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi
>
> I have setup http test with contents check for 3-4 server simultaneously
> for the same host & it worked fine.
> Now for one host we have more than 80 weblogic servers (per server one
> process) running and I want to run http test for all. I can't do the ports
> test as each server must have different port to run & I want to be alerted
> with server name in the alert itself. If I use ports test then I got alert
> only for ports service failure and not the alert with server name failure.
> thoughts?
> If I want to use contents check for all these then is there a nice way to
> do it, as all the service can't even accomodate in the one line on
> bb2.html against specific host. Please suggest.
>
> ~ Haresh
>
>



-- 
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
--- Henry Spencer