3 Replies Latest reply on Apr 13, 2010 4:16 PM by cgregors

    Monitor HP x86 systems via OS or ILO? Which one do people use

    cgregors

              

      I wondered about this for a while and thought I'd ask.

      Given that a typical HP x86 system has an ILO card on it (Intelligent Lights Out) that also can be monitored and the ILO (with the right drivers loaded) also exposes OS information:

      Do you use the ILO to monitor the system, or do you go directly to the OS.

      Here's screenshots of the same system viewed from the ILO and the OS:

        • Re: Monitor HP x86 systems via OS or ILO? Which one do people use
          branfarm

          I've always monitored my servers through the actual interface rather than through iLO.  Honestly, I never knew you could see OS resources by polling iLO, but one thing that immediately comes to mind is what happens if the server actually loses it's network connection without taking the interface down (such as a vlan misconfig)?  It seems that by monitoring via iLO you would never see that host as down, as the iLO address is up regardless if the OS or main network connection is up.

          • Re: Monitor HP x86 systems via OS or ILO? Which one do people use
            ecklerwr1

            I also didn't realize you could get all x86 server info you would normally get on server through its snmp agent also through iLO either.  If you really can do this I guess I would go for monitoring it through the iLO as it's all out of band management.   This way even if the server was down or disconnected from it's regular gig ports (if it's say a DL380 or DL580) then you could still get information it sound like from the iLO card in the server as long as it still has power.

              • Re: Monitor HP x86 systems via OS or ILO? Which one do people use
                cgregors

                Overall I am of the opinion that monitoring OS resources via the OS is the best idea. That includes the network connection(s).

                Reliance on the HP ILO to get the data works in my environment because the sysadmins are pretty anal about putting the ILO drivers in the OS (both Windows and Linux). If the sysadmins didn't do that, there would be no consistent source of data.

                I also am considering that the ILO itself should be monitored. You might notice that the ILO network interface didn't show up in the ILO list.

                Since the ILO can run standalone and gives the sysadmin remote power / console control of the machine, they would probably appreciate knowing if a system located remotely was not controllable anymore.

                Summary:

                1. Monitor OS resources via OS
                2. Monitor ILO resources via ILO