Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!sobeco!stacy From: stacy@sobeco.com (Stacy L. Millions) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains Subject: Re: Monitoring your nameserver Message-ID: <1990Aug30.182942.21342@sobeco.com> Date: 30 Aug 90 18:29:42 GMT References: <9008141525.AA27754@sci.ccny.cuny.edu> <7769@gollum.twg.com> Organization: Sobeco Group - Montreal, Canada Lines: 31 In emv@math.lsa.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti) writes: >In article <7769@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: > A quick hack would be to have a cron job on occasion which either > checks for the existance of critical processes & start's 'em up. Or > just start's em & lets the processes fight over how many of which kind > are to be running. Buuuut.. >Ummmm.... >I would think that the right way of managing these things would be to >embed into them some piece of SNMP (the Simple Network Management Protocol), >and then have them all watched over by a network management station >which could get traps when the daemons die, arrange to have things >restarted, etc etc. This would have the advantage of letting you watch >over a bunch of systems from a single vantage point if you wanted to. The problem with this is, what happens when snmpd or one of its friends dies? It would be hard for snmpd to restart snmpd when snmpd is already dead :-). Serouisly, you don't want to have to build support for snmp into all of your deamons, you want snmp to support your deamons, and if your snmp deamon dies - your sunk. I think I shall tack David's daemon manager onto my TODO list. Unfortunately, my TODO list has me booked into the next century (I plan to take off the years 1999-2001, I don't want to be anywhere near a computer when the century rolls :-). -stacy -- "Eat any good books lately?" uunet!sobeco!stacy - 'Q' _Star Trek, The Next Generation_ stacy@sobeco.com