discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Discuss mailing list
List archive
- From: "Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet)" <nd AT syndicat.com>
- To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
- Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring
- Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 14:23:53 +0200
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
...just in addition:
Tobi Oetiker - the developer of RRDtool vs former MRTG - the "main part" of
smokeping - wrotes the following about smokeping compared to nagios:
"In fact, if you only want to measure latency (so you don't need a full
network monitoring system like Opennms or Nagios) I always recommend
smokeping."
This is the best summary about this question/topic from my view as wrong
decisions are often in cases to choose the right monitoring solution for the
right monitoring scenario.
Smokeping is fine just for graphing performance or latency informations - but
monitoring (or even manage) network / service availability is not the target
of tools like smokeping or cacti (even if cacti offers such as very "basic"
functionality). The major goal of a network monitor is to measure / test
services or service constellations if they appear / operate in defined
borders / limits (working yes/no, response time windows, service flappings
etc.) and alarm the right persons in the right situations if required and
give a current view of the maintained state of a network topology - means
what is(nt) going where and why (not).
If you just still feel faced to scalability borders with smokeping this is
another pro for a out of the box highly scalable and intelligent network
monitoring tool like nagios or others. Why try to solve any problems if you
still have the choice to use a solution not limited such wise?
Setting up nagios is not more difficult as setting up smokeping - if you use
ready to run appliances this is much easier.
Just my two cents...
best regards,
Niels.
- --
Niels Dettenbach
Syndicat IT&Internet
http://www.syndicat.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.0.8
iIEEAREIAEEFAk+44lk6HE5pZWxzIERldHRlbmJhY2ggKFN5bmRpY2F0IElUJklu
dGVybmV0KSA8bmRAc3luZGljYXQuY29tPgAKCRBU3ERlZRyiDcFgAJ9K0xpZlLj6
0wSKlPhzBeWg+6/vEQCeIXFCXizAykKLtUAd8TKvQJRAj6c=
=H7ZZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Falk Husemann, 05/19/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet), 05/19/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Falk Husemann, 05/19/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Brian Koontz, 05/19/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, sjeap, 05/20/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Stephan Jauernick, 05/21/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Niels Dettenbach, 05/21/2012
- [opennic-discuss] More OpenNIC press, mike, 05/23/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Stephan Jauernick, 05/25/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Niels Dettenbach, 05/21/2012
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet), 05/20/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Ryan Trinder, 05/20/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet), 05/20/2012
- Re: [opennic-discuss] OpenNIC Infrastructure Monitoring, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet), 05/19/2012
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.