On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Gerhard Lausser
<gerhard.laus...@consol.de>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > change this in the future, or even better, if it is possible
> > to have distributed passive service checks in some form with
> what exactly do you mean by that? From the clients' view there is one
> ip-address where nsca messages are to be sent to.
> The weak point here is, when Shinken performs an arbiter failover, the
> nsca-listener gets another address. I have no idea how to handle this
> except by integrating the arbiter in some cluster framework with a virtual
> address.
>
Yes, the only solution is a VIP between the two receiver or arbiter IP. But
it's quite easy to setup, so it's not a big deal :)
We can also think about a nsca protocol over multicast too ;)
Jean
>
> Gerhard
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colocation vs. Managed Hosting
A question and answer guide to determining the best fit
for your organization - today and in the future.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d
_______________________________________________
Shinken-devel mailing list
Shinken-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shinken-devel
