Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Passive checks and check_period ...

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    France - Valence
    Posts
    91

    Passive checks and check_period ...

    Hi,
    it seems that Shinken ignores the check_period parameter for passive hosts and services checks ... is there any solution for that passively submitted checks are ignored for certain period of time ?

    BR, Fred.

  2. #2
    Shinken project leader
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Bordeaux (France)
    Posts
    2,130

    Re: Passive checks and check_period ...

    Nop, passive is toally under taht sender responsability sorry
    No direct support by personal message. Please open a thread so everyone can see the solution

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    France - Valence
    Posts
    91

    Re: Passive checks and check_period ...

    I think that it should be interesting il Shinken was able to take care about check_period ... even if a new parameter is necessary. What do you think about it ?

  4. #4
    Shinken project leader
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Bordeaux (France)
    Posts
    2,130

    Re: Passive checks and check_period ...

    For passive? not sure that getting the responsability for cheduling is a good idea, after all, the last state is always better than the old one. If you don't want notification, look at first_notification_delay parameter
    No direct support by personal message. Please open a thread so everyone can see the solution

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •