> Couldn’t you just use a passive monitoring solution and have the remote hosts > sending their data in?
Precisely what I was thinking the problem is that all the current plugins I'm aware of aren't what I would call public network friendly, security seems to have been added as an after thought in most cases. In an ideal world this is what I would like to see being possible:1) A remote node is configured with a standard config and send out to a new site - All it needs is an IP address, hostname of central system and an authentication certificate.2) once onsite the node boots up and talks back to the central system via HTTPS to retrieve it's config at which point it reconfigures itself and starts monitoring3) Alerts are sent back using an external plugin also over HTTPS to the central system4) Periodically the node checks back in to see if it's configuration needs updating - May be possible to do this live if a persistent HTTPS connection is maintained.5) The central system monitors the node using freshness checks, if it doesn't receive any updates for a period of time, it marks the node down and sends an appropriate alert. In effect all that's really needed is an HTTP to Naemon proxy, I guess kind of similar to how Thunk works with MKLiveStatus but for write access instead of read. The basic idea is not to reinvvent the wheel if something already exists (such as using certificate-based auth rather than something more custom). I've been working on this idea even before Naemon was created but not being a developer by trade I do scratch my head on a few bits. Got the basic elements to a proof of concept more or less worked out if it is of interest. Lee
