Re: [hobbit] Alternate view for Management

[Greg Hubbard <glh.forums (at) gmail.com>]

If you ever refer to the same host twice in the bbhost file, you should give
it an IP address of 0.0.0.0 and set it to "noconn".

Why you might be able to do is to create a hierarchy of pages where the top
page "points" to two sub pages, and each of them serves as the top of the
the tree that you want to build, with new subpages to create your hierarchy.

Xymon is not very flexible in presentation, which may be a good thing since
it is easy to outsmart yourself when creating elaborate displays.

Don't overlook the "Critical Systems View".  You can use it to make
"important" things more noticeable.

GLH


On 7/23/09, Harold J. Ballinger <hballinger (at) heritage-healthcare.com> wrote:
>
>  The only way that I could find to make this work was to use “include”
> instead of “dispinclude”, then create a second “fake host” entry with a
> different hostname and duplicate all of the tests using the “testip” tag,
> then use the NAME tag on this second “fake host”.
>
> * *
>
> -
>
>
>
> *Harold Ballinger*
>
> *IT Coordinator*
>
> Heritage Healthcare, Inc.
>
>  (888) 335-2620  | helpdesk
>
>  (864) 224-3626  | office
>
>  (864) 224-3093  | fax
>
> [image: cid:image003.jpg@01CA0167.D630C4A0]
>
> Visit our website: www.heritage-healthcare.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Harold J. Ballinger [mailto:hballinger (at) heritage-healthcare.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2009 2:57 PM
> *To:* 'hobbit (at) hswn.dk'
> *Subject:* RE: [hobbit] Alternate view for Management
>
>
>
> Ok, I’ve made it halfway to my goal and just need a little nudge.
>
>
>
> I modified my bb-hosts to have includes for each page of hosts:
>
>
>
> include bb-hosts-hosted
>
> include bb-hosts-remote
>
> include bb-hosts-connectivity
>
> include bb-hosts-facilities
>
> include bb-hosts-servers
>
> include bb-hosts-test
>
> include bb-hosts-corporate
>
>
>
> I then also included:
>
>
>
> dispinclude bb-hosts-services
>
>
>
> and I then created the bb-hosts-services to look like:
>
>
>
> page services Business Services
>
> group-compress Website
>
> 111.222.33.44 www.mydomain.com # http://www.mydomain.com NAME:"Company
> Website" COMMENT:"Company Website" DESCR:"webserver:Company Website"
>
> 222.33.44.55  media.mydomain.com # http://media.mydomain.com ftp
> NAME:"Company Media Files" COMMENT:"Company Media Files"
> DESCR:"webserver:Company Media Files"
>
> 33.44.55.66   webstats.mydomain.com       # http://webstats.mydomain.comNAME:"Website Statistics" COMMENT:"Website Statistics"
> DESCR:"webserver:Website Statistics"
>
>
>
> I was attempting to get the “Business Services” page to have “friendly
> names” only and not the actual hostnames. I am building this one page so
> that I can run an Availability Report and print this single page for a
> 10,000 ft view of business critical services. I would like for the headings
> and hostnames to be “friendly names” instead of actual hostnames since the
> target audience for this report will be non-technical. (The actual hostnames
> with all appropriate tests are already defined in their appropriate pages
> and those pages are the ones used by IT in their day-to-day jobs.)
>
>
>
> It looks like the dispinclude does what I expected and does not duplicate
> the tests for these hosts, but I couldn’t find a way to make the hostnames
> “friendly”. The NAME, COMMENT, and DESCR don’t seem to have any affect at
> all on this output. The comment doesn’t even show up in parenthesis as it
> normally would.
>
>
>
> I seem to have hit a roadblock… Any ideas?
>
>
>
> * *
>
> -
>
>
>
> *Harold Ballinger*
>
> *IT Coordinator*
>
> Heritage Healthcare, Inc.
>
>  (888) 335-2620  | helpdesk
>
>  (864) 224-3626  | office
>
>  (864) 224-3093  | fax
>
> [image: cid:image003.jpg@01CA0167.D630C4A0]
>
> Visit our website: www.heritage-healthcare.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Harold J. Ballinger [mailto:hballinger (at) heritage-healthcare.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:17 PM
> *To:* hobbit (at) hswn.dk
> *Subject:* [hobbit] Alternate view for Management
>
>
>
> Our support staff likes having our monitoring system setup & organized by
> logical category/type. However, management is more interested in a view that
> is organized by business impact.
>
>
>
> For example:
>
>
>
> IT Top Level View-
>
>   Hosted Services             Corporate Connectivity
>
>   Corporate Servers         Corporate Desktops
>
>   Remote Laptops       Facility Connectivity
>
>   Facility Desktops
>
>
>
> Management Top Level View-
>
>   Email (Subpage containing all dependent hosts/services)
>
>   HRMS (same as above)
>
>  Sales CRM
>
>  i.e. a listing for each “service” provided – possibly even maintained
> below subpages for each business unit
>
>
>
> Management wants availability and impact by the specific service and
> business unit impacted (10,000 foot view showing all dependencies), while IT
> is interested in the detail of the cogs/gears that make it all work.
>
>
>
> Do I just create a second listing for all of the hosts on a separate page
> structure? Would this generate twice as many network tests for the hosts
> that are listed duplicate times?
>
>
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>