Yeah, I'm running BFD with super low timers, however it would be nice to be alerted of a topology change. Our topology is fully redundant, so topology changes aren't always immediately realised, or have a negative affect.
Ben
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Colin Stubbs < colin.stubbs@equatetechnologies.com.au> wrote:
I'd be kicking the carrier to ensure they're using equipment that can adjust link state to your CPE based on at the very least link state on the other side. Most decent media converters/NTU's have features like that to pass link state from one side to the other.
Regardless of whether they do or don't,you should really consider using Bi-Directional Forwarding and/or Uni-Directional Link Detection if they're available.
BFD should be available with all routing protocols these days on halfway decent routing implementations. Even Mikrotik supports it for BGP and OSPF.
Hit google if you're not aware of what they are and how they work.
-Colin
On 20 February 2015 at 11:32, Ben Hohnke settra+observium@gmail.com wrote:
If a carrier circuit goes down, and hands off on an NTU, no interface goes down if the carrier circuit drops.
Ben
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Eduardo Schoedler listas@esds.com.br wrote:
You need to monitor physical interface, on the switch.
2015-02-19 23:28 GMT-02:00 Ben Hohnke settra+observium@gmail.com:
For any Metro/carrier circuit, you will not lose link if the circuit
goes down. I can't think of anything else to monitor, other than bps across the link to catch this.
Ben
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Eduardo Schoedler <listas@esds.com.br
wrote:
OSPF/ISIS are link-state. Why don't you monitor only the interface that is running it?
2015-02-19 23:21 GMT-02:00 Ben Hohnke settra+observium@gmail.com:
I've had a think about this..
As it's not BGP, you can't alert on peer state, but if you define a neighbour's via entity match, such as "router-id match 10.10.*", you could do a "exists eq true" for the test, or "status eq full"
ISIS would be pretty much the same as OSPF
Thoughts?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 6:13 AM, Adam Armstrong adama@memetic.org wrote:
> How would one go about alerting for these? > > The problem we have with most of the things we don't currently alert > on is simply that it's not obvious *how* we should alert on them. > > adam. > > On 20/02/2015 01:02:53, Ben Hohnke settra+observium@gmail.com > wrote: > Are there any plans to add an alert checker for OSPF/IGP Neighbor > state changes? The BGP alerts checkers are great, however I'm looking for a > similar thing for IGP. > > Alternatively, > Does anyone know of a solution for alerting IGP neighbour state > changes? I have 100-200 routers I would need to monitor. > > Thanks in advance, > > Ben > _______________________________________________ observium mailing > list observium@observium.org > http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium > > > _______________________________________________ > observium mailing list > observium@observium.org > http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium > >
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
-- Eduardo Schoedler
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
-- Eduardo Schoedler
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium