On 8/17/06, Marc Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nagios-users-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Danil Kutepkin
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:50 AM
> To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Nagios-users] host check anly after critical service check
>
> Hello nagios-users,
>
>   How to make a host active check (ping) only after a failed service
>   check (ping)?

I don't follow either. Some hosts you may only want to set up a service "PING", but you want the host to also be checked so that you get a single HOST failure, vs a service failure if the host is down.

So setup the host with a check_command           check-host-alive line, and then add a service for the same host

define service{
        use                             generic-service
        host_name      hostname
        service_description             Ping
        check_command                   check-host-alive

If the service check fails, it will force the hose to do a host check, and since well it's probably down, you should only receive a host critical/unreachable alert.

Sorry if your not really talking this basic, then your going to have to provide a bit more information.

You could also force the host to actually be checked like a service by enabling active checks every x minutes (create a new host template)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting 
any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null

Reply via email to