WUG may well be the largest user to hit a site, but I don't think it matters. I check a few pages on our primary site every minute (about 1.8MM hits per day - not huge), and WUG often is the highest user in terms of pages. I don't care about this since I have to monitor site availability closely. Note that WUG will only skew the page count, not other things like bandwidth, hits or unique visitors. The admins can also exclude the monitoring source IP from their reporting. For example, I exclude the IP address of my WUG machine from my AWStats reporting. The requests will still show up in the logs, though.
Matt -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 4:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WhatsUp Forum] Webpage monitoring dilemma I don't know of a way to monitor a web site that will not show in the logs. If you are running these, you could just put an extra site on each box. Then only monitor your test site. That would tell you if the services the site use are up, but not sites themselves. Or just filter your test page out of the log files. -----Original Message----- From: "TC Roffey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 8/27/03 12:29:16 PM To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [WhatsUp Forum] Webpage monitoring dilemma Just a question on my part but if you do it that way it would seem that the biggest user to hit the web sites of these 50 clients would be WUG. Is that okay with the clients? That's going to populate the server syslogs for every call to the html content and I know some admins that gets mighty annoyed with the "noise". TC Roffey Covestic WiFi Support -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 11:59 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [WhatsUp Forum] Webpage monitoring dilemma I would setup a test page for each domain, it would have the same path and name. The content should be close to the same. If you have a database on the website it should check for some info on the site. You could have the page try to do everything that all of the other pages would do. The page should then return an error or an all ok. Then you only need to create one service to monitor all of the sites. Plus when the content changes you don't have to reconfigure all of you services. Jeff Cook Network Administrator Whatcom Educational Credit Union -----Original Message----- From: Alvaro Quesada [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 4:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WhatsUp Forum] Webpage monitoring dilemma Hello, Maybe one of you guys could help me out with my dilemma. I have 50 clients that I need to monitor specific WebPages for (i.e. http://www.yourdomain.com/test.html). Unfortunately just monitoring the http service is not an option. Now each of these clients could possibly have hundreds of pages I would need to monitor. Also these pages could change Daily for all 50 clients. What would be the fastest way to setup a method for this data entry so it doesn't get to be such a chore when I have to swap out old pages and/or add new ones? Currently, I set up one custom device I created for each client then I create a custom service scans for each separate page I need to monitor for each client. As you can tell this will at one point become unmanageable. There is allot of work to be done just to add or remove a page scan, not just that but also I am sure there is a limit as to how many services whats up gold will let you monitor on each device. So if anybody has any ideas on how to make this process less of a chore then I am all ears. Thanks, Al Quesada Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html to be removed from this list. An Archive of this list is available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/whatsup_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
