On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 09:54, Charles Steinkuehler wrote: > Mike Noyes wrote: > > Point taken. I apologize for the misguided question. > > Now you're confusing me...your question wasn't misguided at all.
Charles, I apologize. I thought I had missed something basic. I don't catch things as fast as I did before. :-( > The main reason I'd put monitoring on a more connected box is because I'd > probably want to access it from my desktop web-browser, or via the internet > when I'm traveling, and the primary reason to setup logging over a serial > link is to have a completely disconnected machine that (presumably) can't be > compromised by an attacker keeping accurate logs. Correct, but I was starting to think, from our conversation, RRD didn't supply information that would be useful in case of a compromise. > Also, in several > instances, I'm running the monitoring programs on machines very remote to > the actual firewalls (try running a serial line from California, Colorado, > or Kansas to Texas!). Understood. > If you're happy using the logging machine's console (and pretty much only > that console) to monitor the status of your LEAF box, there's no reason you > can't (or shouldn't) do so...provided you can get all the info you want to > monitor headed to the log file (and find/create appropriate log analysis tools). ok. Thanks for the information. I appreciate it. :-) -- Mike Noyes <mhnoyes at users.sourceforge.net> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ SF.net Projects: ffl, leaf, phpwebsite, phpwebsite-comm, sitedocs ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
