Re: [Observium] Could not resolve
Your thoughts for Big Company and Big ISPs are small. Nobody wants to add thirty thousand devices in a hostname list, or with an nonsense script. They will choose a system that will be allowed to add devices by a subnet or network. That it means IP Address. Not hostname.
We are not talking about servers hostnames, that are static, and won't change, even if the room is burned and the building is down. We are not talking about a BGP Router, or a Main router, that are always and forever there, if possible.
We are talking about thousand of devices that are changing, at least, once a day.
Ron,
An DNS fail, doesn't mean I have one DNS server. With all your expertise, you should see other possibilities, other scenarios.
Come on. It simply doesn't make sense to have a system that allow you to add a Device by IP address when it wants and later, it's not possible anymore. But you can try tomorrow, because tomorrow the system will accept the IP address.
This is a bug for me.
Joseph,
The system works with IP Address. Whats is the diference to have an option to add devices by IP Address? Not even an option, because it already works, but just sometimes, if you are lucky.
Another point, Sure I can make a script, but we are not talking about an expert user to be using the system. Can't this scenario be thought?
We have "normal" people operating the system too. How do you think they will reach the Knowledge for this? They not even have access to the system console.
You are closing your mind to main possibilities.
I am talking about adding 3000 devices in a system, where these devices, does not need a hostname, it simply needs an IP address for eventual access. Because if we have a hostname like juliocesar.company.com, tomorrow, this device will be deactivated and activated for another customer with another name but the same IP address, and it's an infinite routine, because customers are not eternal, and IP addresses are not infinite.
Can you imagine an system where we need advanced user only to use?
Do you think Microsoft and Apple would be where they are with a software where only advanced user are able to use?
Adam,
What is an important device to you? Do you think that a customer side device isn't important to be monitored?
How many devices have you ever seen in a network?
Have you worked in an ISP?
Do you have an Idea of what is to manage device hostnames for, until now, 7 cities?
Em seg, 9 de mai de 2016 18:49, observium-request@observium.org escreveu:
Send observium mailing list submissions to observium@observium.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to observium-request@observium.org
You can reach the person managing the list at observium-owner@observium.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of observium digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: Could not resolve (Ron Marosko)
- Re: Cannot add Device by IP Address but can by hostname (Ivan Jukic)
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 16:41:23 -0500 From: "Ron Marosko" ron@rjr-services.com To: "'Observium Network Observation System'" observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] Could not resolve Message-ID: 004901d1aa3b$888ba2e0$99a2e8a0$@rjr-services.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I just want to touch this one point below, and then I’m done.
If you’re running your entire organization on a single DNS server, then you shouldn’t even be working in this industry.
There are certain fundamental components in any network infrastructure that should be redundant. DNS, by far, is high on the list of those components. You should *always* have multiple DNS servers redundant to each other. Maybe even have redundant load balancers front-ending those DNS servers. That’s even more true when you’re hosting/running authoritative DNS servers for certain domains. Whatever NMS you choose to run, even that isn’t as high a priority for redundancy.
It all goes back to good network and server architecture and design. If you don’t have a solid base for all that, then all the higher level stuff is just going to fold like a house of cards. If you spend the extra time to do things right and not half-assed, then you’ll have a solid network and have good reporting on everything. Don’t be that half-ass guy.
From: observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Claudionei Mendes Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 11:37 AM To: observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] Could not resolve
<excess stuff removed>
What if my DNS server, that is a monitored server as well fails?
<excess stuff removed>
ok, since r7844 (Pro, rolling) possible to add devices without FQDN hostname..
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Claudionei Mendes < claudionei.mendes@gmail.com> wrote:
Your thoughts for Big Company and Big ISPs are small. Nobody wants to add thirty thousand devices in a hostname list, or with an nonsense script. They will choose a system that will be allowed to add devices by a subnet or network. That it means IP Address. Not hostname.
We are not talking about servers hostnames, that are static, and won't change, even if the room is burned and the building is down. We are not talking about a BGP Router, or a Main router, that are always and forever there, if possible.
We are talking about thousand of devices that are changing, at least, once a day.
Ron,
An DNS fail, doesn't mean I have one DNS server. With all your expertise, you should see other possibilities, other scenarios.
Come on. It simply doesn't make sense to have a system that allow you to add a Device by IP address when it wants and later, it's not possible anymore. But you can try tomorrow, because tomorrow the system will accept the IP address.
This is a bug for me.
Joseph,
The system works with IP Address. Whats is the diference to have an option to add devices by IP Address? Not even an option, because it already works, but just sometimes, if you are lucky.
Another point, Sure I can make a script, but we are not talking about an expert user to be using the system. Can't this scenario be thought?
We have "normal" people operating the system too. How do you think they will reach the Knowledge for this? They not even have access to the system console.
You are closing your mind to main possibilities.
I am talking about adding 3000 devices in a system, where these devices, does not need a hostname, it simply needs an IP address for eventual access. Because if we have a hostname like juliocesar.company.com, tomorrow, this device will be deactivated and activated for another customer with another name but the same IP address, and it's an infinite routine, because customers are not eternal, and IP addresses are not infinite.
Can you imagine an system where we need advanced user only to use?
Do you think Microsoft and Apple would be where they are with a software where only advanced user are able to use?
Adam,
What is an important device to you? Do you think that a customer side device isn't important to be monitored?
How many devices have you ever seen in a network?
Have you worked in an ISP?
Do you have an Idea of what is to manage device hostnames for, until now, 7 cities?
Em seg, 9 de mai de 2016 18:49, observium-request@observium.org escreveu:
Send observium mailing list submissions to observium@observium.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to observium-request@observium.org
You can reach the person managing the list at observium-owner@observium.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of observium digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: Could not resolve (Ron Marosko)
- Re: Cannot add Device by IP Address but can by hostname (Ivan Jukic)
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 16:41:23 -0500 From: "Ron Marosko" ron@rjr-services.com To: "'Observium Network Observation System'" observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] Could not resolve Message-ID: 004901d1aa3b$888ba2e0$99a2e8a0$@rjr-services.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I just want to touch this one point below, and then I’m done.
If you’re running your entire organization on a single DNS server, then you shouldn’t even be working in this industry.
There are certain fundamental components in any network infrastructure that should be redundant. DNS, by far, is high on the list of those components. You should *always* have multiple DNS servers redundant to each other. Maybe even have redundant load balancers front-ending those DNS servers. That’s even more true when you’re hosting/running authoritative DNS servers for certain domains. Whatever NMS you choose to run, even that isn’t as high a priority for redundancy.
It all goes back to good network and server architecture and design. If you don’t have a solid base for all that, then all the higher level stuff is just going to fold like a house of cards. If you spend the extra time to do things right and not half-assed, then you’ll have a solid network and have good reporting on everything. Don’t be that half-ass guy.
From: observium [mailto:observium-bounces@observium.org] On Behalf Of Claudionei Mendes Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 11:37 AM To: observium@observium.org Subject: Re: [Observium] Could not resolve
<excess stuff removed>
What if my DNS server, that is a monitored server as well fails?
<excess stuff removed>
participants (2)
-
Claudionei Mendes -
Mike Stupalov