From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 22 14:29:38 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD0D9106568B for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:29:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3B4C8FC08 for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55E6C46B1A; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 10:29:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 15:29:38 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Marc Balmer In-Reply-To: <2DC22872-96F5-4C0A-82E4-F9755A10E245@msys.ch> Message-ID: References: <6101e8c40908211917k69c82491w3cff00a527d14873@mail.gmail.com> <19e9a5dc0908212303j28a6913er604bfd06e7df81ec@mail.gmail.com> <2DC22872-96F5-4C0A-82E4-F9755A10E245@msys.ch> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Aur=E9lien_M=E9r=E9?= , Oliver Pinter , Gonzalo Nemmi , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Common interface for sensors/health monitoring X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:29:38 -0000 On Sat, 22 Aug 2009, Marc Balmer wrote: >> I was looking for the same info a time ago .. something that would allow me >> to gather all the info from the same place, but the only thing I came up >> with was the very same discussion about the sensors framework port and >> nothing else. >> >> Any info on any such proyect will be greatly apreciated > > The OpenBSD sensors framework lacks some desireable features, e.g. event > capabilities like getting an event if a certain threshold is exceeded. And > it propbably was used for things that it better had not (yes, I am culprit > for on of these (ab)uses...). > > I am sure these features could be added if only the code was in the tree to > hack on... One of the things I'd particularly like to see is an alignment between kernel/user level monitoring frameworks and the SNMP model (especially relating to traps). The SNMP information model (MIBs, agents, traps, etc) has its limitations, but having a compatible model at all layers of the system will make it easier to store, manipulate, manage, and report this information consistently throughout the OS and larger distributed systems. Robert