Various places I've worked used Nagios very effectively for monitoring. http://www.nagios.org/about/
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Umarzuki Mochlis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2009/3/6 Kyle Schmitt <[email protected]> > >> >> I was looking at getting some sort of company-wide monitoring software >> (possibly with some level of system control). Most things I've come >> across are using some mix of SNMP & custom agents loaded on each and >> every system. If you pare it all down, it seems that nagios, zenoss >> and anything else worth mentioning, are pretty faces on a mix of SNMP >> and little agents. >> >> With that in mind, is SNMP worth the trouble as a protocol? Forget >> which pretty face it wears. I've always shied away from SNMP (with >> small number of servers it didn't make sense), so I've got no >> practical experience with it. >> >> Is it too much of a hassle for the risk? Are the rewards of using it >> that great? > > IMHO, SNMPv3 is quite secure and if you want that fancy graphs from data it > can get, it is worth the hassle. > >> >> >> It seems that two weeks can't go without reading about an SNMP >> vulnerability, but at the same time, many packages, and IT >> departments, rely on it, even if they don't know it. >> >> >> Thanks for any advice, >> --Kyle >> >> PS: Yes I have some monitoring system in place now: it's a mix of home >> grown agents and syslog. >> >> >> > > > -- > Regards, > > Umarzuki Mochlis > http://gameornot.net > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users Group. To post a message, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit our group at http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
