Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: NSCA vs Shinken restart

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    NSCA vs Shinken restart


    The customer I'm working for require that NSCA packtets are AES encrypted.
    Hence, we use the legacy nsca binary daemon + shinken named-pipe module instead of Shinken Nsca module. (I will be working on a patch for that later)

    The problem we face is that is Shinken Named-pipe module did destroy the fifo on exit. (I did a ptch for that). But, the main issue is with the usage of the module named-pipe as an Arbiter module.

    We change a simple parameter shinken-arbiter have to re restarted, kill the module named-pipe. This can lead to crash or worse freeze of the NSCA binary daemon.

    The solution is to run named-pipe as a receiver module instead of an arbiter one.

    What is the advantage of the named-pipe module on the arbiter ?
    AS you can see above, it may lead to big issues with NSCA. No doubt other tools will have similar problems when the use the named-pipe as well.

    As a best pratice, it can be specified as a comment in arbiter.cfg and reciever.cfg that named-pipe module is best on the receiver.

    What do you say ?

  2. #2
    Shinken project leader
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Bordeaux (France)

    Re: NSCA vs Shinken restart

    Use the receiver, they are done for such cases. Such modules on the arbiter is more for history compatibility, the good way is receiver, especially because they can do direct routing and it's far easier to scale
    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