Hi, > On 15. Jun 2018, at 10:29, Peter Eckel <li...@eckel-edv.de> wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > >> Time periods in Icinga 2 have initially been designed to allow for >> alternative implementations. There have been related experiments, but as >> far as I know no other implementation has ever been published. > > funny, just this week I asked myself the same question ... thanks for > clarifying.
I’ve updated the docs for 2.9: https://github.com/Icinga/icinga2/pull/6372 Icinga 2 v2.6.0 added default templates for objects where the import of “legacy-timeperiod” is not necessary anymore. At the time of writing, there are no plans to extend timeperiods to use a different mechanism, this was just in the design >4 years ago. Turned out that such dynamic periods cannot be rendered into a database scheme where one could reliably do SLA reporting at some later point. > > A related question, or maybe an idea for an upcoming alternative > implementation: Is there any way to define time periods in a different time > zone than the one used for the server? There’s an open feature request for this: https://github.com/Icinga/icinga2/issues/5374 Kind regards, Michael _______________________________________________ icinga-users mailing list icinga-users@lists.icinga.org https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users
