ailure
> notifications. Scope is not clear from "sending alerts from router" section
> in FS
>
> Thanks,
> Sanjeev
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 6:26 AM
> To:
>
clear from "sending alerts from router" section in
FS
Thanks,
Sanjeev
-Original Message-
From: John Kinsella [mailto:j...@stratosec.co]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 6:26 AM
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
Thx for putting this toge
illed the next x units after the monitor script
>> is up again.
>>
>> Also, there could be many other approaches as well.
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Santhosh
>>
>> From: Jayapal Reddy Uradi [jayapalreddy.ur...@
> Santhosh
> ____________
> From: Jayapal Reddy Uradi [jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 5:17 AM
> To:
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
>
> Hi,
>
> +users list
adi [jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 5:17 AM
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
Hi,
+users list
If any one is already using any tools for monitoring then please share your
ideas.
Also share the cases where you experienced
anks,
>> Jayapal
>>
>> On 02-Oct-2013, at 3:25 AM, Simon Weller wrote:
>>
>>> supervisord maybe?
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>>
>>> From: "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>&
hanks,
>Jayapal
>
>On 02-Oct-2013, at 3:25 AM, Simon Weller wrote:
>
>> supervisord maybe?
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>
>> From: "Chiradeep Vittal"
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 4:45:5
--
>> >
>> > From: "Chiradeep Vittal"
>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 4:45:56 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
>> >
>> > Got it. Any other OSS to
om: "Chiradeep Vittal"
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 4:45:56 PM
> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
> >
> > Got it. Any other OSS tool out there similar to monit?
> >
> > On 10/1
Vittal"
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 4:45:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
>
> Got it. Any other OSS tool out there similar to monit?
>
> On 10/1/13 8:24 AM, "David Nalley"
supervisord maybe?
- Original Message -
From: "Chiradeep Vittal"
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 4:45:56 PM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
Got it. Any other OSS tool out there similar to monit?
On 10/1/
Got it. Any other OSS tool out there similar to monit?
On 10/1/13 8:24 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Chiradeep Vittal
> wrote:
>> SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It
>>is
>> simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. T
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:27:57AM +, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
> The proposal does
> not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the
> AGPL.
The proposal talks about using it, and that's enough to trigger the
AGPL. This is a *very bad* thing IMO. For example, $dayjob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Chiradeep Vittal
wrote:
> SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It is
> simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. The proposal does
> not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the
> AGPL.
Let m
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/26/13 10:27 AM, "Alex Huang" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Using SNMP for alert notification is not a bad idea though. I don't
>>>> see
>>>>>> why we can't do that instead
t;>>> why we can't do that instead of posting to the management server.
>>> This
>>>>> is specifically referring to the second part of the proposal. Why
>>>>> reinvent that part of it?
>>>>>
>>>>> --Alex
>>&
t;see
>> >>why we can't do that instead of posting to the management server.
>>This
>> >>is specifically referring to the second part of the proposal. Why
>> >>reinvent that part of it?
>> >>
>> >>--Alex
>> >>
&g
> >>is specifically referring to the second part of the proposal. Why
> >>reinvent that part of it?
> >>
> >>--Alex
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
> >>> Se
referring to the second part of the proposal. Why
>>reinvent that part of it?
>>
>>--Alex
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:28 PM
>>> T
al. Why
>reinvent that part of it?
>
>--Alex
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:28 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service mon
From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:28 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
>
> SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts
I think monit is already in the current system vm template. I know at least
the scripts in tools/appliance add it (maybe that was a post 4.2 change). +1
for monit.
Darren
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 10:27 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> wrote:
>
> SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it gen
SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It is
simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. The proposal does
not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the
AGPL.
I think the idea is to have a tight monitoring loop that scales: so
exec
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Jayapal Reddy Uradi
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently in virtual router there is no way to recover and notify if some
> service goes down unexpectedly.
>
> This feature is about monitoring all the services rendered by the virtual
> router, ensure that the services are r
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 04:30:33PM +, Jayapal Reddy Uradi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently in virtual router there is no way to recover and notify if some
> service goes down unexpectedly.
>
> This feature is about monitoring all the services rendered by the virtual
> router, ensure that the serv
25 matches
Mail list logo
