From Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com Mon Nov 1 16:08:33 2010 From: Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com (Sorrell, Al) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 11:08:33 -0400 Subject: [smokeping-users] Re-arranging menus, files Message-ID: <3899F44EE8372C44926752C5C84C13D3B8929529@OMTCP36040.corp.troweprice.net> I think what I want to do is straight-forward, but I haven't seen it discussed so though I'd throw it out just in case there are some hidden issues. I want to rearrange my menus because of organizational changes. I think this can be accomplished by stopping Smokeping, changing the config info for the affected items, mv'ing (renaming) the appropriate files and/or directories and restarting Smokeping. Here's an example of what I want to do OldMenu OldConfig Old File TopLevel + TopLevel -> menu=TopLevel $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel - Entry1 ++ Entry1 -> menu=Entry1 $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry1 -- Target1 +++ Target1-> menu=Target1,host=... $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry1/Target1.rrd - Entry2 ++ Entry2 -> menu=Entry2 $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry2 NewMenu NewConfig New File NewTop + NewTop -> menu=TopLevel $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop - EntryA ++ EntryA -> menu=EntryA $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop/EntryA -- TargetB +++ TargetB-> menu=TargetB,host=... $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop/EntryA/TargetB.rrd - Entry2 ++ Entry2 -> menu=Entry2 $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop/Entry2 Steps: 1) Stop Smokeping 2) cd $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry1; mv Target1.rrd TargetB.rrd 3) cd $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel; mv Entry1 EntryA 4) cd $SMOKEPING_DATA; mv TopLevel NewTop 5) edit $SMOKEPING/etc/configs to reflect locations as above 6) double check all of the above! ;-) 7) re-start $SMOKEPING Anyone see any gotcha's in the above? Thanks, Al _________________________ Almon (Al) Sorrell Corporate Network Services | Network Engineering Consultant T. Rowe Price 4515 Painters Mill Road, TE9008 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Phone: 410-345-3042 (508-3042) Fax:410-345-3135 Email: Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com T. Rowe Price (including T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. and its affiliates) and its associates do not provide legal or tax advice. Any tax-related discussion contained in this e-mail, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to any other party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Please consult your independent legal counsel and/or professional tax advisor regarding any legal or tax issues raised in this e-mail. The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized use, copying, disclosure, or distribution of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the sender and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. From tobi at oetiker.ch Mon Nov 1 18:17:58 2010 From: tobi at oetiker.ch (Tobias Oetiker) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 18:17:58 +0100 (CET) Subject: [smokeping-users] Re-arranging menus, files In-Reply-To: <3899F44EE8372C44926752C5C84C13D3B8929529@OMTCP36040.corp.troweprice.net> References: <3899F44EE8372C44926752C5C84C13D3B8929529@OMTCP36040.corp.troweprice.net> Message-ID: Hi Al, this sounds about right ... make sure you kill not only smokeping but also the webinterface (speedy). note, smokeping will never remove rrd files, so the danger is not all that great, except that new rrd files could get created. cheers tobi Today Sorrell, Al wrote: > I think what I want to do is straight-forward, but I haven't seen it discussed so though I'd throw it out just in case there are some hidden issues. I want to rearrange my menus because of organizational changes. I think this can be accomplished by stopping Smokeping, changing the config info for the affected items, mv'ing (renaming) the appropriate files and/or directories and restarting Smokeping. Here's an example of what I want to do > > OldMenu OldConfig Old File > TopLevel + TopLevel -> menu=TopLevel $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel > - Entry1 ++ Entry1 -> menu=Entry1 $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry1 > -- Target1 +++ Target1-> menu=Target1,host=... $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry1/Target1.rrd > - Entry2 ++ Entry2 -> menu=Entry2 $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry2 > > NewMenu NewConfig New File > NewTop + NewTop -> menu=TopLevel $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop > - EntryA ++ EntryA -> menu=EntryA $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop/EntryA > -- TargetB +++ TargetB-> menu=TargetB,host=... $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop/EntryA/TargetB.rrd > - Entry2 ++ Entry2 -> menu=Entry2 $SMOKEPING_DATA/NewTop/Entry2 > > Steps: > 1) Stop Smokeping > 2) cd $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel/Entry1; mv Target1.rrd TargetB.rrd > 3) cd $SMOKEPING_DATA/TopLevel; mv Entry1 EntryA > 4) cd $SMOKEPING_DATA; mv TopLevel NewTop > 5) edit $SMOKEPING/etc/configs to reflect locations as above > 6) double check all of the above! ;-) > 7) re-start $SMOKEPING > > Anyone see any gotcha's in the above? > > Thanks, > Al > > _________________________ > Almon (Al) Sorrell > Corporate Network Services | Network Engineering Consultant > T. Rowe Price > 4515 Painters Mill Road, TE9008 > Owings Mills, MD 21117 > Phone: 410-345-3042 (508-3042) Fax:410-345-3135 > Email: Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com > > > > > T. Rowe Price (including T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. and its affiliates) and its associates do not provide legal or tax advice. Any tax-related discussion contained in this e-mail, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to any other party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Please consult your independent legal counsel and/or professional tax advisor regarding any legal or tax issues raised in this e-mail. > > The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized use, copying, disclosure, or distribution of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the sender and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. > > _______________________________________________ > smokeping-users mailing list > smokeping-users at lists.oetiker.ch > https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/smokeping-users > > -- Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland http://it.oetiker.ch tobi at oetiker.ch ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900 From adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com Fri Nov 5 02:03:26 2010 From: adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com (Adam Hardy) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 01:03:26 +0000 Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? Message-ID: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> I have a small LAN at home connected up to the net via a DSL modem on a gateway machine running lenny and iptables, and newly smokeping to monitor it all. I have a problem with some software running on a windows machine on the LAN where the company who wrote the sofware say that there must be something wrong with my internet connection, but can't help any further. I'd like to know what tests I can run to verify that my config and my firewall are OK, especially regarding PMTU. I tried running without my firewall but it makes no difference so maybe it's something else out there with my ISP before it hits the public net. What can I do with ping? This ping command gives suspicious results: ping -s 1473 mktgw1.ibllc.com One byte less and it works. Fragmentation also works for normal websites like news.bbc.co.uk. I'd massively appreciate any help with this! I'm stuck with either my own mistake, or until I can prove I haven't made one. Thanks Adam From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Fri Nov 5 09:15:41 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 08:15:41 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: Hi there, On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > I have a problem with some software running on a windows machine on the LAN > where the company who wrote the sofware say that there must be something wrong > with my internet connection, but can't help any further. Sounds to me like they don't know something that they ought to know. Can you tell us more about this software and the problem? > I'd like to know what tests I can run to verify that my config and > my firewall are OK, especially regarding PMTU. Have you got a firewall in addition to the Lenny box? > I tried running without my firewall but it makes no difference ... Hmmmm. Probably not the firewall then. :) > ... so maybe it's > something else out there with my ISP before it hits the public net. > > What can I do with ping? Er, you can ping things, but not a lot more. > This ping command gives suspicious results: > > ping -s 1473 mktgw1.ibllc.com > > One byte less and it works. That sounds normal. Does this help? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_transmission_unit > I'd massively appreciate any help with this! I'm stuck with either my own > mistake, or until I can prove I haven't made one. Why not get Wireshark running and take a look at the traffic in all its gory detail? I'm not sure yet that you've made any mistake. -- 73, Ged. From chris+smokeping at aptivate.org Fri Nov 5 09:09:47 2010 From: chris+smokeping at aptivate.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 08:09:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: Hi Adam, On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > I have a problem with some software running on a windows machine on the > LAN where the company who wrote the sofware say that there must be > something wrong with my internet connection, but can't help any further. > > I'd like to know what tests I can run to verify that my config and my > firewall are OK, especially regarding PMTU. > > I tried running without my firewall but it makes no difference so maybe > it's something else out there with my ISP before it hits the public net. Simply running "without a firewall" is not enough to make it work. The firewall has to actively reverse NAT the ICMP Unreachable messages that it receives from the Internet for PMTU to work. > What can I do with ping? This ping command gives suspicious results: > > ping -s 1473 mktgw1.ibllc.com You didn't tell us the results. You also didn't tell us what the actual problem is with the software. I would forget about ping and run Wireshark or tcpdump on your firewall, capturing packets on both sides and comparing the differences. Look for a packet received on one side that's not forwarded correctly to the other, or look for the point where the conversation stops. I would also consider trying a different Internet connection, e.g. a 3G dongle or a friend's DSL router/connection. Cheers, Chris. -- Aptivate | http://www.aptivate.org | Phone: +44 1223 760887 The Humanitarian Centre, Fenner's, Gresham Road, Cambridge CB1 2ES Aptivate is a not-for-profit company registered in England and Wales with company number 04980791. From adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com Sun Nov 7 00:37:00 2010 From: adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com (Adam Hardy) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2010 23:37:00 +0000 Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> Adam Hardy on 05/11/10 01:03, wrote: > I have a small LAN at home connected up to the net via a DSL modem on a gateway > machine running lenny and iptables, and newly smokeping to monitor it all. > > I have a problem with some software running on a windows machine on the LAN > where the company who wrote the sofware say that there must be something wrong > with my internet connection, but can't help any further. > > I'd like to know what tests I can run to verify that my config and my firewall > are OK, especially regarding PMTU. Thanks for the replies. Essentially the problem is that my client software for a financial brokerage application logs repeated disconnects from the data servers and this causes the display of charts to fail because it can't fetch the required past data. The disconnects occur mainly in the late afternoon and evening London time (GMT+0) and it makes the application virtually unusable. Magically at 23:00 every night the disconnects stop and I am able to work normally. This is why I would like to monitor it in smokeping, but I haven't found a test that will fail yet which correlates with the application's disconnect phases. First of all though I would like to set up a smokeping monitor that shows that pathway MTU discovery is working. I thought I could use ping for this, with parameters to prevent fragmentation. However since the path is liable to change, this is probably tricky. I am familiar with MTU but not an expert. That wikipedia page was very good and had a few points that were totally new to me - for instance that network switches have built-in capability to detect when a device is jabbering and block it until it resumes proper operation. I wonder whether my connection is perceived by a switch out there as 'jabber'. That would be what I hope to monitor. When I said I dropped my firewall rules, I meant I left the NAT'ing rules in there and just had an open gateway. This is what I mean: Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 1 packets, 60 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 MASQUERADE all -- * eth1 192.168.0.0/24 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 1 packets, 60 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Unfortunately the DSL modem I use also has an iptables firewall, undocumented by the manufacturer, which I can telnet to drop the rules. On the modem I assume that I don't need any NAT'ing at all or anything else. No rules at all, right? I expect that I will install wireshark to monitor my iptables in action, but I think at this point I would rather set up tests to monitor what is going on with the internet and the broker client software, around the clock just in case my ISP is doing something strange with the broadband connection. I have thought about getting another ISP and trying out the connectivity there, but that could be very dissatisfactory is another type of broadband error crops up, and anyway all non-British-Telecom ISPs except cable and satellite use the British Telecom equipment closely. I hope that puts my issue into a more comprehensible light. Thanks Adam From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Mon Nov 8 13:12:34 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:12:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: Hi there, On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > The disconnects occur mainly in the late afternoon and evening London time > (GMT+0) and it makes the application virtually unusable. Magically at 23:00 > every night the disconnects stop and I am able to work normally. Then I'm tempted to suggest that BT is throttling your connection. Try downloading something with a BitTorrent client and monitor the transfer rates when your application is working properly and when it is giving trouble. Even on a BT business connection when I'm using torrents to grab things like Linux distros I see a factor of at least ten change in transfer rates overnight. Can you change to port numbers used by the application? If not, it might be worth investigating VPNs. -- 73, Ged. From adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com Mon Nov 8 13:55:07 2010 From: adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com (Adam Hardy) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 12:55:07 +0000 Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> G.W. Haywood on 08/11/10 12:12, wrote: > On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: >> The disconnects occur mainly in the late afternoon and evening London time >> (GMT+0) and it makes the application virtually unusable. Magically at 23:00 >> every night the disconnects stop and I am able to work normally. > > Then I'm tempted to suggest that BT is throttling your connection. > Try downloading something with a BitTorrent client and monitor the > transfer rates when your application is working properly and when it > is giving trouble. Even on a BT business connection when I'm using > torrents to grab things like Linux distros I see a factor of at least > ten change in transfer rates overnight. > > Can you change to port numbers used by the application? If not, it > might be worth investigating VPNs. Let me get this straight. If BT is throttling my connection, that means that they are just randomly but consistently dropping packets instead of letting them through? I assume that normal operation of ICMP would mean that I don't notice this, except when ICMP is impaired, this will lead to issues like I'm seeing with the online broker app? I'm quite ready to believe that BT are doing that, although I haven't noticed any difference in speed test results. Then again I have heard that BT's throttling recognises the speed test sites and doesn't throttle that traffic. Can I set up probes in smokeping to monitor this? Thanks Adam From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Mon Nov 8 15:11:57 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 14:11:57 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: Hi there, On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > Let me get this straight. If BT is throttling my connection, that means that > they are just randomly but consistently dropping packets instead of letting them > through? I don't know exactly what they're doing, I just see the effects of whatever it is as a marked slowdown in torrent download speeds. If I had to guess I'd say that what they do probably isn't random, because the problem they face isn't random. > I assume that normal operation of ICMP would mean that I don't notice this, > except when ICMP is impaired, this will lead to issues like I'm seeing with the > online broker app? I'm sure that you need to look at the actual application traffic to know what's causing problems with your application. Utilities like ping aren't much more than a quick diagnostic tool. > ... > Can I set up probes in smokeping to monitor this? You can use probes which will send packets using the ports used by your application. -- 73, Ged. From adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com Tue Nov 9 11:25:33 2010 From: adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com (Adam Hardy) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 10:25:33 +0000 Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: <4CD9219D.3020907@cyberspaceroad.com> G.W. Haywood on 08/11/10 14:11, wrote: > On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: >> Can I set up probes in smokeping to monitor this? > > You can use probes which will send packets using the ports used by > your application. This is what their docs say about ports: "IB accepts connections on port 4000 from inbound traffic from ports 1024 or higher. This is required for connection to our servers. If you are using a firewall, these ports will need to be provided for within its configuration." I interpreted this to mean that my iptables rules will be ok if I allow everything outbound from the gateway, and allow all inbound packets on established connections through. If I use port 4000 for probing the connection to the IB broker, using ping, I don't think it's going to provide much info - is that what you're telling me? From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Tue Nov 9 18:05:18 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:05:18 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD9219D.3020907@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD9219D.3020907@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: Hi there, On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > This is what their docs say about ports: "IB accepts connections on port 4000 http://bgp.he.net/ipv6-progress-report.cgi > I interpreted this to mean that my iptables rules will be ok if I allow > everything outbound from the gateway, and allow all inbound packets on > established connections through. I think you're probably right. :) > If I use port 4000 for probing the connection to the IB broker, using ping, I > don't think it's going to provide much info - is that what you're telling me? Take a look at TCPPing. -- 73, Ged. From adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com Tue Nov 9 23:38:14 2010 From: adam.ant at cyberspaceroad.com (Adam Hardy) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 22:38:14 +0000 Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD9219D.3020907@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: <4CD9CD56.5090505@cyberspaceroad.com> G.W. Haywood on 09/11/10 17:05, wrote: > Hi there, > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > >> This is what their docs say about ports: "IB accepts connections on port 4000 > > http://bgp.he.net/ipv6-progress-report.cgi That went over my head. You think ipv6 might have something to do with my issue? From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Tue Nov 9 23:54:23 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 22:54:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] best test to use? In-Reply-To: <4CD9CD56.5090505@cyberspaceroad.com> References: <4CD357DE.1020909@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD5E69C.8090002@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD7F32B.2050409@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD9219D.3020907@cyberspaceroad.com> <4CD9CD56.5090505@cyberspaceroad.com> Message-ID: Hi there, On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > G.W. Haywood on 09/11/10 17:05, wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Adam Hardy wrote: > > > >> This is what their docs say about ports: "IB accepts connections on port 4000 > > > > http://bgp.he.net/ipv6-progress-report.cgi > > That went over my head. You think ipv6 might have something to do with my issue? Aaargh. No. I don't know how I managed that, I was reading the BIND list at the same time and managed to transpose a couple of references. The reference I meant to give was this: http://www.speedguide.net/port.php?port=4000 Please accept my apologies for the confusion. -- 73, Ged. From jbendtsen at laerdal.dk Wed Nov 17 14:54:51 2010 From: jbendtsen at laerdal.dk (Jon Bendtsen) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:54:51 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] fping probes gives no graph output Message-ID: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> Hi fping probes gives no graph output. I installed smokeping from debian lenny on a guru plug arm computer, but only my ssh and EchoPingHttp produces any graphs. There is nothing for all the fping ones, neither for normal ping package size or for 1024 bytes package size. When i start smokeping it does say: Starting latency logger daemon: smokeping### fping seems to report in 0.999998639788102 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. ### assuming you are using an fping copy reporting in milliseconds ### fping seems to report in 0.999996494430095 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. ### assuming you are using an fping copy reporting in milliseconds ### assuming you are using an fping copy reporting in milliseconds ### fping seems to report in 0.999999722276026 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. ### assuming you are using an fping copy reporting in milliseconds ### fping seems to report in 0.999999823748882 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. . Following http://oss.oetiker.ch/smokeping/doc/smokeping_install.en.html i got fping from debian unstable which did change the fping version number from 2.4b2-to-ipv6-15 to 2.4b2-to-ipv6-16.1 but the startup output is still the same. JonB From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Wed Nov 17 16:05:17 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:05:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] fping probes gives no graph output In-Reply-To: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> References: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> Message-ID: Hi there, On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Jon Bendtsen wrote: > fping probes gives no graph output. > > I installed smokeping from debian lenny ... Same mistake I made. Remove the package, install from the tarball on the Smokeping site. You mght find that running smokeping with debugging enabled gives you some clues. Amongst other things when I installed from Lenny my main problems were that the formats of the RRD files were all wrong and they were all in the wrong places; some binaries (e.g. fping) expected parameters to be passed which were different from the parameters which were actually being passed by Smokeping; and of course the package was about two years out of date. -- 73, Ged. From ntyni+smokeping-users at mappi.helsinki.fi Wed Nov 17 20:57:42 2010 From: ntyni+smokeping-users at mappi.helsinki.fi (Niko Tyni) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:57:42 +0200 Subject: [smokeping-users] fping probes gives no graph output In-Reply-To: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> References: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> Message-ID: <20101117195742.GA3245@madeleine.local.invalid> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:54:51PM +0100, Jon Bendtsen wrote: > fping probes gives no graph output. > > I installed smokeping from debian lenny on a guru plug arm computer, but only my ssh and EchoPingHttp produces any graphs. There is nothing for all the fping ones, neither for normal ping package size or for 1024 bytes package size. > > When i start smokeping it does say: > > ### fping seems to report in 0.999996494430095 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. This is probably . If fping is indeed unusable on armel, I think this should be treated as a release critical bug for Debian. I'll see what I can do to help. -- Niko Tyni ntyni at debian.org From ntyni+smokeping-users at mappi.helsinki.fi Wed Nov 17 21:51:44 2010 From: ntyni+smokeping-users at mappi.helsinki.fi (Niko Tyni) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:51:44 +0200 Subject: [smokeping-users] fping probes gives no graph output In-Reply-To: <20101117195742.GA3245@madeleine.local.invalid> References: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> <20101117195742.GA3245@madeleine.local.invalid> Message-ID: <20101117205144.GA4895@madeleine.local.invalid> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:57:42PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:54:51PM +0100, Jon Bendtsen wrote: > > > fping probes gives no graph output. > > > > I installed smokeping from debian lenny on a guru plug arm computer, but only my ssh and EchoPingHttp produces any graphs. There is nothing for all the fping ones, neither for normal ping package size or for 1024 bytes package size. > > > > When i start smokeping it does say: > > > > ### fping seems to report in 0.999996494430095 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. > This is probably . If fping is indeed > unusable on armel, I think this should be treated as a release critical > bug for Debian. I'll see what I can do to help. Looking closer, it might be something else after all. What does fping -C 1 127.0.0.1 say on your system? Does fping appear to work otherwise? I assume you are running the 'armel' architecture rather than the discontinued 'arm' one? FWIW, both fping itself and the Smokeping fping probe do seem to work for me on a qemu emulated armel system. -- Niko Tyni ntyni at debian.org From alex.beber at guest.arnes.si Thu Nov 18 00:49:25 2010 From: alex.beber at guest.arnes.si (Alex Beber) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 00:49:25 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] Paralel procesing. In-Reply-To: References: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> Message-ID: <4CE46A05.3020109@guest.arnes.si> Hi! I have a section with 300 devices and when i open up the section in browser it takes quite some time to show all the graphs. The machine is dual CPU with each 4 cores. And i got only one core 100% utilized. Is there any fix to use parallel processing to speed up the loading time? Thanx Alex G.W. Haywood wrote: > Hi there, > > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Jon Bendtsen wrote: > > >> fping probes gives no graph output. >> >> I installed smokeping from debian lenny ... >> > > Same mistake I made. > > Remove the package, install from the tarball on the Smokeping site. > > You mght find that running smokeping with debugging enabled gives you > some clues. Amongst other things when I installed from Lenny my main > problems were that the formats of the RRD files were all wrong and > they were all in the wrong places; some binaries (e.g. fping) expected > parameters to be passed which were different from the parameters which > were actually being passed by Smokeping; and of course the package was > about two years out of date. > > -- > > 73, > Ged. > > _______________________________________________ > smokeping-users mailing list > smokeping-users at lists.oetiker.ch > https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/smokeping-users > From elmi at 4ever.de Thu Nov 18 10:59:37 2010 From: elmi at 4ever.de (Elmar K. Bins) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:59:37 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] RRDs::update ERROR filling this newbie's logs... Message-ID: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> Hi guys, since I have not been able to find this in the mailing list archives, I'd like to ask the people with experience on this mailing list: I have installed the current smokeping (--version says "2.003006") on a server yesterday, and my log file fills up with: smokeping[20766]: RRDs::update ERROR: /var/lib/smokeping/......rrd: illegal attempt to update using time 1290043178 when last update time is 1290071168 (minimum one second step) (like every few seconds for every probe I run) Restarting smokeping does not help at all. I have never seen that in older versions or on other servers. Where should I be looking? Yours, Elmar. -- "Machen Sie sich erst einmal unbeliebt. Dann werden Sie auch ernstgenommen." (Konrad Adenauer) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]--- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.oetiker.ch/pipermail/smokeping-users/attachments/20101118/c114e354/attachment.pgp From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Thu Nov 18 11:31:40 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:31:40 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] RRDs::update ERROR filling this newbie's logs... In-Reply-To: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> References: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> Message-ID: Hi there, On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > illegal attempt to update using time 1290043178 > when last update time is 1290071168 (minimum one second step) 1290043178 - 1290071168 = ? > ... > Where should I be looking? At your clocks. You're attempting to update a file with a data point which, as far as the file is concerned, is almost 8 hours in the past. -- 73, Ged. From jbendtsen at laerdal.dk Thu Nov 18 11:14:59 2010 From: jbendtsen at laerdal.dk (Jon Bendtsen) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:14:59 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] fping probes gives no graph output In-Reply-To: <20101117205144.GA4895@madeleine.local.invalid> References: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> <20101117195742.GA3245@madeleine.local.invalid> <20101117205144.GA4895@madeleine.local.invalid> Message-ID: <6EE17BE4-78BD-48B3-B7D3-98D2EFF6CF86@laerdal.dk> On 17/11/2010, at 21.51, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:57:42PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:54:51PM +0100, Jon Bendtsen wrote: >> >>> fping probes gives no graph output. >>> >>> I installed smokeping from debian lenny on a guru plug arm computer, but only my ssh and EchoPingHttp produces any graphs. There is nothing for all the fping ones, neither for normal ping package size or for 1024 bytes package size. >>> >>> When i start smokeping it does say: >>> >>> ### fping seems to report in 0.999996494430095 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. > >> This is probably . If fping is indeed >> unusable on armel, I think this should be treated as a release critical >> bug for Debian. I'll see what I can do to help. > > Looking closer, it might be something else after all. What does > > fping -C 1 127.0.0.1 > > say on your system? Does fping appear to work otherwise? > > I assume you are running the 'armel' architecture rather than the > discontinued 'arm' one? > > FWIW, both fping itself and the Smokeping fping probe do seem to work > for me on a qemu emulated armel system. dkplugbab9:~# uname -a Linux dkplugbab9 2.6.32-00007-g56678ec #1 PREEMPT Mon Feb 8 03:49:55 PST 2010 armv5tel GNU/Linux dkplugbab9:~# ping -C 1 127.0.0.1 ping: invalid option -- C Usage: ping [-LRUbdfnqrvVaA] [-c count] [-i interval] [-w deadline] [-p pattern] [-s packetsize] [-t ttl] [-I interface or address] [-M mtu discovery hint] [-S sndbuf] [ -T timestamp option ] [ -Q tos ] [hop1 ...] destination dkplugbab9:~# ping -c 1 127.0.0.1 PING 127.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.074 ms --- 127.0.0.1 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.074/0.074/0.074/0.000 ms dkplugbab9:~# JonB From chris+smokeping at aptivate.org Thu Nov 18 11:32:14 2010 From: chris+smokeping at aptivate.org (Chris Wilson) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:32:14 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] RRDs::update ERROR filling this newbie's logs... In-Reply-To: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> References: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> Message-ID: Hi Elmar, On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > smokeping[20766]: RRDs::update ERROR: /var/lib/smokeping/......rrd: > illegal attempt to update using time 1290043178 when last update time is > 1290071168 (minimum one second step) Did the server's clock go back in time by about eight hours this morning? RRD databases can only go forward in time. You can only add new data values at future times (later than the last value in the database). It will fix itself in 8 hours, but your graphs may not make a lot of sense because you might have 8 hours of data missing without even a gap in the graph data (because the meaning of the axis changed). Alternatively, perhaps the server's clock was accidentally set to a future time while smokeping was running, and then corrected? In this case you will have a gap of 8 hours in your graphs. Cheers, Chris. -- Aptivate | http://www.aptivate.org | Phone: +44 1223 760887 The Humanitarian Centre, Fenner's, Gresham Road, Cambridge CB1 2ES Aptivate is a not-for-profit company registered in England and Wales with company number 04980791. From jbendtsen at laerdal.dk Thu Nov 18 11:35:25 2010 From: jbendtsen at laerdal.dk (Jon Bendtsen) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:35:25 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] fping probes gives no graph output In-Reply-To: <6EE17BE4-78BD-48B3-B7D3-98D2EFF6CF86@laerdal.dk> References: <3C377A9C-8B0E-41FC-9336-5E4D688C2FCC@laerdal.dk> <20101117195742.GA3245@madeleine.local.invalid> <20101117205144.GA4895@madeleine.local.invalid> <6EE17BE4-78BD-48B3-B7D3-98D2EFF6CF86@laerdal.dk> Message-ID: <5B3AB85F-3C0A-44AA-B450-12428382A8BF@laerdal.dk> On 18/11/2010, at 11.14, Jon Bendtsen wrote: > > On 17/11/2010, at 21.51, Niko Tyni wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:57:42PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:54:51PM +0100, Jon Bendtsen wrote: >>> >>>> fping probes gives no graph output. >>>> >>>> I installed smokeping from debian lenny on a guru plug arm computer, but only my ssh and EchoPingHttp produces any graphs. There is nothing for all the fping ones, neither for normal ping package size or for 1024 bytes package size. >>>> >>>> When i start smokeping it does say: >>>> >>>> ### fping seems to report in 0.999996494430095 milliseconds (old version?) at /usr/share/perl5/smokeping/Smokeping/probes/FPing.pm line 71. >> >>> This is probably . If fping is indeed >>> unusable on armel, I think this should be treated as a release critical >>> bug for Debian. I'll see what I can do to help. >> >> Looking closer, it might be something else after all. What does >> >> fping -C 1 127.0.0.1 >> >> say on your system? Does fping appear to work otherwise? >> >> I assume you are running the 'armel' architecture rather than the >> discontinued 'arm' one? >> >> FWIW, both fping itself and the Smokeping fping probe do seem to work >> for me on a qemu emulated armel system. > > dkplugbab9:~# uname -a > Linux dkplugbab9 2.6.32-00007-g56678ec #1 PREEMPT Mon Feb 8 03:49:55 PST 2010 armv5tel GNU/Linux > > dkplugbab9:~# ping -C 1 127.0.0.1 dkplugbab9:~# fping -C 1 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 : [0], 84 bytes, 1762304 ms (1762304 avg, 0% loss) 127.0.0.1 : 1762304.04 the previous email was a cut'n'paste mistake. From elmi at 4ever.de Thu Nov 18 11:36:28 2010 From: elmi at 4ever.de (Elmar K. Bins) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:36:28 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] RRDs::update ERROR filling this newbie's logs... In-Reply-To: References: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> Message-ID: <20101118103627.GG46965@ronin.4ever.de> Re! ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) wrote: > On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > > > illegal attempt to update using time 1290043178 > > when last update time is 1290071168 (minimum one second step) > > 1290043178 - 1290071168 = ? > > > ... > > Where should I be looking? > > At your clocks. You're attempting to update a file with a data point > which, as far as the file is concerned, is almost 8 hours in the past. Ok, now I understand the error message fully. Thanks for the quick response. This is a virtual server, so I have no control over the hardware clock, the server is forced to run on PST, that is obviously what the hosting guys set the hardware clock to, so I configured the correct timezone to align the server with reality. Of course, the clock is running forward, it does not jump, and it does certainly not go back in time. My feeling here is that the data point is using UTC, but is being compared to the local time (meaning PST here). Is there a way around that? Should that be considered a bug? Elmar. -- "Machen Sie sich erst einmal unbeliebt. Dann werden Sie auch ernstgenommen." (Konrad Adenauer) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]--- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.oetiker.ch/pipermail/smokeping-users/attachments/20101118/21368a18/attachment.pgp From ged at jubileegroup.co.uk Thu Nov 18 13:51:00 2010 From: ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:51:00 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [smokeping-users] RRDs::update ERROR filling this newbie's logs... In-Reply-To: <20101118103627.GG46965@ronin.4ever.de> References: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> <20101118103627.GG46965@ronin.4ever.de> Message-ID: Hi there, On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > This is a virtual server ... Time often seems to be a problem on virtual servers. :( > ... I configured the correct timezone to align the server with > reality. Of course, the clock is running forward, it does not jump, > and it does certainly not go back in time. Well not often, anyway. :) > My feeling here is that the data point is using UTC, but is being compared > to the local time (meaning PST here). > > Is there a way around that? Should that be considered a bug? The RRD files store time as seconds since the 'epoch'. They have no knowledge of timezones. Somehow you're attempting to update a file or files with a data point or points which are older than the youngest in the existing file(s). That's never going to work with RRD. This isn't a bug in RRD, it's a fault in the way it's being used. Did you change the timezone after creating the RRD files and starting to use them? That might not be the best way of approaching it. :) -- 73, Ged. From jbirdson at smith.edu Thu Nov 18 16:03:30 2010 From: jbirdson at smith.edu (Jacy Birdsong) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:03:30 -0500 Subject: [smokeping-users] never before seen loss color pattern: green, green, blue, BLACK, green, green... Message-ID: <4CE4F9F20200009A0004A929@gwsmtp1.smith.edu> >>> Jacy Birdsong 11/10/2010 10:03 AM >>> Hi Everyone, I have been seeing a very strange intermittent absence of loss color although the latency graphing is continuos. I see 4 green blocks, then a blue one, then a black (or missing) one, and then this just repeats. It has been doing this for a day now. The day before it was 4 green blocks, then purple, then red, and then the cycle repeats like that - which made sense. This server just started acting up last week and I don't understand why the loss color would disappear and reappear every 5 blocks. If anyone has seen anything like this and can shed some light that would help, it would be much appreciated. None of the other SmokePing monitored servers do this - in fact, all of the other servers that I am monitoring have a green loss color for the most part. Thanks! Jacy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.oetiker.ch/pipermail/smokeping-users/attachments/20101118/f748eee4/attachment-0001.htm From elmi at 4ever.de Fri Nov 19 10:08:52 2010 From: elmi at 4ever.de (Elmar K. Bins) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:08:52 +0100 Subject: [smokeping-users] RRDs::update ERROR filling this newbie's logs... In-Reply-To: References: <20101118095936.GD46965@ronin.4ever.de> <20101118103627.GG46965@ronin.4ever.de> Message-ID: <20101119090852.GL46965@ronin.4ever.de> Re again GW, ged at jubileegroup.co.uk (G.W. Haywood) wrote: > Time often seems to be a problem on virtual servers. :( Yup. Why can't they just set their hardware to UTC and leave :( > > My feeling here is that the data point is using UTC, but is being compared > > to the local time (meaning PST here). > > > > Is there a way around that? Should that be considered a bug? > > The RRD files store time as seconds since the 'epoch'. They have no > knowledge of timezones. Somehow you're attempting to update a file or > files with a data point or points which are older than the youngest in > the existing file(s). That's never going to work with RRD. Ah - *now* I get it. It's not the *last* data point it complains about, it is *any* dp in the file that might be off. > Did you change the timezone after creating the RRD files and starting > to use them? Spot on. ;) > That might not be the best way of approaching it. :) I guess so. Timezone business always confuses me. Thanks for your help in keeping my logfiles green; I'll go and drop all the rrd files now, so this can start again clean... Yours, Elmi. -- "Machen Sie sich erst einmal unbeliebt. Dann werden Sie auch ernstgenommen." (Konrad Adenauer) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]--- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.oetiker.ch/pipermail/smokeping-users/attachments/20101119/44184102/attachment.pgp From Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com Fri Nov 26 21:22:07 2010 From: Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com (Sorrell, Al) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 15:22:07 -0500 Subject: [smokeping-users] multiple instances of CiscoRTTMonEchoICMP probes? Message-ID: <3899F44EE8372C44926752C5C84C13D3B928FA01@OMTCP36040.corp.troweprice.net> All, I'm running into an issue where CiscoRTTMonEchoICMP probes are taking more than one polling cycle to complete. I've seen how you can instantiate more than one copy of Fping, but trying something similar for CiscoRTTMonEchoICMP didn't work as it couldn't find the 2nd "copy" of the .pm file. Is this possible? Any tips? I really don't want to start doing master/slaves at this point. Thanks, Al _________________________ Almon (Al) Sorrell Corporate Network Services | Network Engineering Consultant T. Rowe Price 4515 Painters Mill Road, TE9008 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Phone: 410-345-3042 (508-3042) Fax:410-345-3135 Email: Al_Sorrell at troweprice.com T. Rowe Price (including T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. and its affiliates) and its associates do not provide legal or tax advice. Any tax-related discussion contained in this e-mail, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding any tax penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to any other party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Please consult your independent legal counsel and/or professional tax advisor regarding any legal or tax issues raised in this e-mail. The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized use, copying, disclosure, or distribution of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the sender and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. From meng.beh at centrelink.gov.au Mon Nov 29 02:09:48 2010 From: meng.beh at centrelink.gov.au (meng.beh at centrelink.gov.au) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 12:09:48 +1100 Subject: [smokeping-users] Smokeping and preconfigured udp jitter ip-sla [SEC=UNOFFICIAL] Message-ID: <13524_1290993066_4CF2FDA9_13524_178372_47_OFCB3D5572.93C28478-ONCA2577EA.0005B8DB-CA2577EA.000663B8@centrelink.gov.au> Hi all, I've just joined this mailing list to ask a question: how do I use smokeping to monitor some UDP jitter IP SLA probes I've already configured on my Cisco routers? Thanks. Meng Beh "Be Network'd" ********************************************************************** IMPORTANT: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this communication in error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. ********************************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.oetiker.ch/pipermail/smokeping-users/attachments/20101129/05e465f2/attachment.htm