For the sake of posterity: The problem with the scheme that I have proposed below is that it breaks using contacts as web access-control for hosts, services, etc., so you have to use the 'authorized_for_*' directives in cgi.cfg.
Wil
On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 15:28 -0700, Wil Cooley wrote:
> We are in the process of rebuilding our Nagios setup, which is an
> ancient 1.x installation, to 3.2.1.
>
> We want to re-implement the following policy for notifications:
> * During the work day, everyone in contactgroup gets notifications
> * Outside of working hours,
> * On-call person gets paged immediately
> * Everyone in contactgroup gets paged after 5 notifications
>
> This is currently implemented by having 2 contact objects for every
> user, one for work-hours and one for off-hours, each with appropriate
> *_notification_periods. Notifications go to all N*2 contacts and the
> individual contact's notification periods handles whether or not to
> page.
>
> I believe we can implement the policy using escalations. First, all
> hosts & services have a contact that delivers notifications to a shared
> IMAP folder, to get around the requirement of these objects having
> contacts.
>
> Next, to implement the work-hours piece, a service escalation such as:
>
> define serviceescalation {
> hostgroup_name unix-hosts
> service_description *
> contact_groups unix-admins
> first_notification 1
> last_notification 0
> escalation_period work-hours
> }
>
> And a corresponding hostescalation.
>
> To implement the off-hours piece, escalations such as:
>
> define serviceescalation {
> hostgroup_name unix-hosts
> contact_groups on-call
> service_description *
> first_notification 1
> last_notification 0
> escalation_period off-hours
> }
>
> define serviceescalation {
> hostgroup_name unix-hosts
> contact_groups unix-admins
> service_description *
> first_notification 5
> last_notification 0
> escalation_options c
> escalation_period off-hours
> }
>
> With this setup, all "real" notifications happen through these
> escalations, in effect using them as a "servicenotification" object,
> which kinda seems better from a data-normalization perspective (but
> IANADBA).
>
> Does this seem like it should work as I expect? Can anyone see any
> problems? I have not actually tried this, so I don't know if it works.
>
> As an aside, does anyone have any ideas of how to test this kind of
> thing? Perhaps submitting passive check results and having timeperiods
> of "oddminutes" and "evenminutes"?
>
> Wil
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by
>
> Make an app they can't live without
> Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> 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
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by: Show off your parallel programming skills. Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________ 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
