Hi,
Am 06.03.2015 um 10:13 schrieb Kai Nothdurft:
I see propaganda for the (good) built-in distributed monitoring
architecture but NO word, that the old way does NOT work anymore.
"Propaganda". Oh well ...
You'll find other things not being implemented as well. Icinga 2 is an
entire rewrite from scratch, and we decided that >2 years ago during the
design process what's important to support, and what not. Certain
features have been added again, but in a different way (like on-demand
macros in 2.3 as object attribute accessors).
http://docs.icinga.org/icinga2/latest/doc/module/icinga2/chapter/migration#differences-1x-2
In my test-setup now the config is accepted, but it looks like my
"ohcp_command"-script is never executed.
Just because that configuration is nonsense, and not documented
_anywhere_
in the icinga2 docs.
Why so rude? I think you are right, that the configuration does not
work. But "nonsense"? That something is not documented means that it is
not implemented?
That's not rude, but my personal opinion on adding something to the
configuration which is not documented. If you take it personal, I am
sorry about that.
You say the documentation always reflects the latest
state?
Correct. We have a deep passion about development and documentation, and
take care of documenting everything once implemented. If you think
something is missing, let us know and we'll fix that. Or send a patch
yourself.
I could argue that it is nonsense, that Icinga2 takes the
options
from my conf-file without complaining. When it takes options w/o errors
or warnings one can assume, that the options are valid and that they
have an
effect.
You probably should read about global constants and variables, as that's
what your definition causes Icinga 2 to read and think. Or rather, there
is no difference between main and object configuration anymore. That's
also something which makes Icinga 2 different to Icinga 1.x.
Btw, the documentaion for Icinga2 at docs.icinga.org lacks a
search
engine, which forced me to use Google, which in turn often displays
results
for Icinga even when searched for Icinga2.
That's correct and the web doc module developer is already working on a fix.
Again, I think you don't know anything about maritime business.
You're wrong. Being a developer doesn't imply that I don't know anything
about real use case scenarios. I've been a sysadmin and community
supporter for many years now.
I only
need status updates every half an hour or so. Now that I know, that
ocsp/ohcp is not implemented in Icinga2 (thanks for clarifying), I'll
write a cron-job which gets the data via livestatus and feeds that to
our file-transfer-routine. But I have to read the docs for klivestatus
first...
As said, use an Icinga 2 Cluster with your ships being satellites.
That's something I suggest to anyone working in the maritime business,
not only you. Fun fact: I did that yesterday and talked about that with
a customer.
Kind regards,
Michael
--
https://twitter.com/dnsmichi
https://github.com/dnsmichi
http://www.legendiary.at
_______________________________________________
icinga-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users
