Richard Elling wrote: > Liane Praza wrote: >> Dale Ghent wrote: >> >>> I was thinking this morning about SMF and realized that it lacks a >>> feature to export alerts or service state changes outside of the >>> system. Such a mechanism would be useful in order to alert a NMS that >>> a service has gone offline, online, or is in maintenance. >>> >> >> Totally agreed. We've called this "Transitions", and while I put some >> of the plumbing into svc.startd to make it easier a while ago, we >> haven't managed to actually staff this work yet. Transitions would >> allow you to select between an SNMP trap, email notification, or simple >> execution of a shell script on a specified state transition. >> >> (The only real tricky part is the configuration of messages. Some sites >> may not want notification of all transitions for all services. An easy >> an flexible way to describe the desired policy is important. The rest >> is a fairly straightforward fault-tolerant coding exercise.) >> > > Couldn't we leverage syseventd? It seems to me that it would be > better than writing all of that stuff into SMF.
We could leverage all sorts of different things. I wasn't trying to propose authoring any large new subsystems, or avoiding using appropriate existing APIs available. I don't think it makes sense to do implementation design on-alias, especially when there's not someone who has signed up to do the work leading the discussion. I trust that anyone who picks up the implementation task will do a reasonable job determining how best to implement it, and that flaws will be caught in either design or code review which would happen on this alias. As such, I'll bow out of a discussion which hypothesizes implementation until someone who is actively working on the implementation is involved. :) liane
