|Subject:||[nv-l] question: generating alerts for iferrors, discards, and utilization|
|Date:||Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:13:12 -0500|
|Delivered-to:||mailing list email@example.com|
|Delivery-date:||Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:15:53 +0000|
|Mailing-list:||contact firstname.lastname@example.org; run by ezmlm|
We have been monitoring interface utilization, discards, and errors for years now, generating alerts into Tivoli TEC from netview when they go over threshold. We also track and graph them via mrtg/rrdtool.
Recently, I have been having an internal debate as to the merits of this strategy. I believe that it is useful to track all three and alert on them if they are over threshold. Others think that only misbehaving links are of interest (errors/discards), and utilization does not matter (is not actionable) unless the link is "broken/impaired". (I suppose it gets into how deeply one wants to react to possibly service affecting conditions)
we check in /out snmp variables every 10 min and alert as follows:
If% Discards >25 % of inbound packets discarded
If% Errors >20 % of inbound packets with errors
If% Util >95 % of packets received / bandwidth
Q: I was wondering what other people do for interface performance alerting? do they focus mostly on interface up/down? or node up/down?
if you are polling and thresholding, what values are you using? when do you consider a line to be sufficiently impaired that it time to call the carrier?
any comments appreciated
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||RE: [nv-l] NetView managing devices with dynamic IP addresses, Davis, Donald|
|Next by Date:||[nv-l] SNMP MIB OBJECT-ID OBJECT-TYPE, Allison, Jason (JALLISON)|
|Previous by Thread:||[nv-l] NetView managing devices with dynamic IP addresses, Dale Shaw|
|Next by Thread:||[nv-l] SNMP MIB OBJECT-ID OBJECT-TYPE, Allison, Jason (JALLISON)|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|
Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd
See also: The NetView Web