TECHZEN Zenoss User Community ARCHIVE  

SNMP monitoring off for hostname

Subject: SNMP monitoring off for hostname
Author: [Not Specified]
Posted: 2014-02-12 19:08

Getting along pretty good with our new Core 4.2.4 monitoring five servers counting the Centos 6.5 Zenoss host and the main network stack switching.
SNMP is working well on most of it, but with Exchange 2007 on Windows 2008 the modeler finds "SNMP monitoring off for hostname". This same problem had been around in older versions (fairly easily found via Google) and seemed related to having dots in the path to $ZENHOME in installs built from source code. (Checked and no dots in the path) The ignore flag for SNMP is false. And, snmpwalk by command line from the terminal on the Centos Zenoss server terminal returns a abundance of MIB lines.

By the way, am I looking in the wrong place for a functioning search tool for the Zenoss dot org Forums


San Diego, CA

Subject: Look at the monitoring
Author: [Not Specified]
Posted: 2014-02-14 10:59

Look at the monitoring templates for the Device Tree where you have your Windows will most likely find that those servers are being monitored with WMI, not SNMP. Therefore it's safe to change SNMP monitoring to false.


Subject: SNMP now Working on Exchange Server
Author: [Not Specified]
Posted: 2014-02-18 16:04

I do not know why it is now working but it seems to have started working later the day this item was first posted. For this Exchange Server it is now getting data from both SNMP and Winperf. In the middle of my four days off which I just returned from, the Winperf crashed for some reason. I restarted it about four hours ago and the Winperf is now working as expected along with the SNMP. The only two other Windows boxes under monitor so far are only getting SNMP data. The difference between those two and Exchange is that the two just getting SNMP have only Windows template and Exchange has Windows and Exchange templates.

< Previous
Zenhub hates me! (Solved)
Liberation Fonts Installed and New 4.2.5 Core Install does not agree