Expanding my use of Zenoss I find that several of the sites I
monitor use the same range of private IP addresses, for example
192.168.1.0/24. If I only monitor, through the use of a single
port-forward, the main server at each site I end up with a picture
like this:
Server1 at public ip address A1.B1.C1.D1 (which only has an
interface on 192.168.1.1)
Server2 at public ip address A2.B2.C2.D2 (which only has an
interface on 192.168.1.1)
And both servers have a default route to 192.168.1.254.
Add to that my own internal network which also happens to use
192.168.1.0/24, replete with a router at 192.168.1.254 and once you
have Zenoss draw the map and it concludes all servers are connected
to the same router! To avoid this problem there has to be some way
to indicate that there exist islands of private address space. How
do other management platforms handle this? How can we enhance
Zenoss to handle this?
This is a very good question that does come up fairly often. It would
be easy enough to have a setting in Zenoss that let you define
networks that should not be considered unique and default it to the
RFC1918 allocations. The challenge is programatically defining the
rules that decide when serverA at 192.168.1.23/24 is on the same
network as serverB at 192.168.1.33/24.
I'd be interested to hear suggestions for ways that this could be
accomplished. The only way to gracefully handle this kind of scenario
with Zenoss at the current time is to deploy multiple Zenoss master
servers and aggregate them through the enterprise-only ZGD (Zenoss
Global Dashboard.)
_______________________________________________
zenoss-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users
