[hobbit] big brother replacement
josh at imaginenetworksllc.com
Sat Nov 3 03:46:05 CET 2007
I really like this mailing list - you learn quite a bit even just by reading
the questions of others. I'm the only system administrator around here so I
need a shoulder to lean on every once and a while!
Are you saying you've used BB so much that you know it too well and need a
replacement? Sounds kind of backwards to me =P
On 11/2/07, joe <joe at tmsusa.com> wrote:
> We have no official bb support, just google, and the experience of local
> admins. But it's been here so long that infrastructure has grown up around
> which really drives the need for a drop-in replacement.
> Josh Luthman wrote:
> > Joe,
> > Do you have any support to any extent with BB? The main reason I
> > switched was that there was a mailing list to look to for support.
> > Secondly, it wasn't BB.
> > Josh
> > On 11/2/07, *Sloan* <joe at tmsusa.com <mailto:joe at tmsusa.com>> wrote:
> > Deiss, Mark wrote:
> > >
> > > For a vanilla BB environment, you can have multiple BBDISPLAY
> > > but the recommendation is that there is only one BBNET entity. A
> > > server that is generating the pings out to the clients will be
> > sending
> > > the ping results to all of the BBDISPLAY entities (as defined on
> > > BBNET host). If you have multiple BBNET entities that ping the
> > > servers, you will be sending duplicated results as far as the
> > > individual BBDISPLAY servers are concerned (the connection
> > > will be renamed to the host being pinged). To support multiple
> > > in a non-race environment requires additional coding to carefully
> > > direct the BBNET results to not trip over each other. The default
> > > behavior is to pump them out to whatever BBDISPLAY is listed - you
> > > the race conditions when you want all the BBDISPLAY servers to
> > monitor
> > > all of the BBNET hosts (i.e. want BBNET to send their client-side
> > > tests to the BBDISPLAY entities - this will result in the BBNET
> > > messages going out to all the BBDISPLAY entities also).
> > >
> > Interestingly enough, we've been running redundant bb servers for
> > lan, without any concern for race conditions and while that has it's
> > peculiar behavior in corner cases, we've never seen any sort of
> > intractable problems with it. The general consensus here is that
> > redundancy is good, except for the notifications - we don't want to
> > notified twice for every incident, thus the so-called bb "failover"
> > capability saves us that annoyance with no extra hacks required.
> > I probably made it sound a lot more sophisticated than it really is
> - we
> > really just have active/active BBNET/BBDISPLAY servers, with the
> > delegation of BBPAGER decided by the failover status.
> > It looks like Henrik has a good roadmap to get there in 4.3 from
> what I
> > read here, so hopefully we've got our bb replacement at last. The
> > other concern is that we copy all bb notifications as snmp traps to
> > netcool, but it looks as though that should be with a hobbit plugin.
> > Joe
> > To unsubscribe from the hobbit list, send an e-mail to
> > hobbit-unsubscribe at hswn.dk <mailto:hobbit-unsubscribe at hswn.dk>
> > --
> > 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
> To unsubscribe from the hobbit list, send an e-mail to
> hobbit-unsubscribe at hswn.dk
1100 Wayne St
Troy, OH 45373
Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
--- Henry Spencer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Xymon