From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 17 12:41:04 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A502816A4CE
	for <isp@freebsd.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:41:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from complx.LF.net (complx.LF.net [212.9.190.63])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA96C43F85
	for <isp@freebsd.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:41:03 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from lists@complx.LF.net)
Received: from lists by complx.LF.net with local (Exim 4.14)
	id 1ALqBC-000Om2-3Y; Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:41:02 +0100
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:41:02 +0100
From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@complx.LF.net>
To: Damian Gerow <damian@sentex.net>
Message-ID: <20031117204102.GI61630@complx.LF.net>
References: <20031117203641.GG98840@sentex.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20031117203641.GG98840@sentex.net>
cc: isp@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Daily/weekly/monthly output aggregation
X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Services Providers <freebsd-isp.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp>,
	<mailto:freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-isp>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp>,
	<mailto:freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:41:04 -0000

Hi!

On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 03:36:41PM -0500, Damian Gerow wrote:
> I 'read' roots e-mail on only a handful of systems (~50, I'd say).

Same here.

> I have a couple of ideas for a periodic status output aggregation system,
> but before I try to re-invent the wheel, what do other people do with root's
> e-mail?  Read it individually?  Parse it, and only pass on the interesting
> tidbits?  Flat out ignore it, and use other utilities to check system
> sanity?  (I've pondered doing this last one many a time.)

We plan to replace the mailed output by centrally collecting the
results and defining some sort of "needs action" output.

But, well, we're not yet there. We need a solution, as well.

-- 
MfG/Best regards, Kurt Jaeger                                  17 years to go !
LF.net GmbH        fon +49 711 90074-23  pi@LF.net  
Ruppmannstr. 27    fax +49 711 90074-33
D-70565 Stuttgart  mob +49 171 3101372