Some thoughts about alerts, acks and escalations
I'm beginning to look at the issue of escalating alerts. And I've had an idea that I'd like to get some feedback on before I go ahead and implement it.
Right now, Hobbit doesn't handle escalating an alert. When someone receives an alert message, they can ack it - when they do, all alerts stop and the item disappears from the "Critical systems" page (the NK page).
BB has the concept of escalating an alert, meaning that some recipients of an alert will get the alert message even if the alert has been acknowledged.
What I'd like to have is the BB system with a finer granularity. A recipient in the hobbit-alerts.cfg file has an associated "level", default is 1.
I want our NOC guys who do nothing but stare at the NK page 24x7 to be able to acknowledge an alert - and that just gets it off their monitor, it doesn't stop alerts from going out. A "level 0" acknowledgment - this is just to log that a trouble ticket has been raised for the issue.
A technician (who is a "level 1" recipient) can acknowledge the alert he receives - this will stop alert messages from going out to other "level 1" receipients, so all of the engineers can concentrate on doing what needs to be done.
Alerts will still be sent to recipients who are "level 2" and above - these are the equivalent of the BB "escalation" alerts. They can ack the alert if they'd like to turn off more alert messages, of course.
You can have even higher levels if you like, probably going up the hierarchy of managers. I don't think we'll using more than the 3 levels I've described, but there is no reason to impose any limit.
Does that sound like it would be useful?
Regards, Henrik
Hi Henrik,
for me it would be a "nice to have" feature. What I would set on top of a wishlist would be a failover server solution, so that the guys who stare at the NK page 24x7 will have something to stare at when the hobbit server crashes ;-) Nevertheless I want to say thank you for your great work!
Regards, Stefan
>From: Henrik Stoerner <henrik at hswn.dk> >Reply-To: hobbit at hswn.dk >To: hobbit at hswn.dk >Subject: [hobbit] Some thoughts about alerts, acks and escalations >Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 07:49:07 +0200 > >I'm beginning to look at the issue of escalating alerts. And I've had >an idea that I'd like to get some feedback on before I go ahead and >implement it. > >Right now, Hobbit doesn't handle escalating an alert. When someone >receives an alert message, they can ack it - when they do, all alerts >stop and the item disappears from the "Critical systems" page (the NK >page). > >BB has the concept of escalating an alert, meaning that some >recipients of an alert will get the alert message even if the alert >has been acknowledged. > > >What I'd like to have is the BB system with a finer granularity. A >recipient in the hobbit-alerts.cfg file has an associated "level", >default is 1. > >I want our NOC guys who do nothing but stare at the NK page 24x7 to be >able to acknowledge an alert - and that just gets it off their >monitor, it doesn't stop alerts from going out. A "level 0" >acknowledgment - this is just to log that a trouble ticket has been >raised for the issue. > >A technician (who is a "level 1" recipient) can acknowledge the alert >he receives - this will stop alert messages from going out to other >"level 1" receipients, so all of the engineers can concentrate on >doing what needs to be done. > >Alerts will still be sent to recipients who are "level 2" and above - >these are the equivalent of the BB "escalation" alerts. They can ack >the alert if they'd like to turn off more alert messages, of course. > >You can have even higher levels if you like, probably going up the >hierarchy of managers. I don't think we'll using more than the 3 >levels I've described, but there is no reason to impose any limit. > > >Does that sound like it would be useful? > > >Regards, >Henrik > >To unsubscribe from the hobbit list, send an e-mail to >hobbit-unsubscribe at hswn.dk > >
Henrik Stoerner wrote:
I'm beginning to look at the issue of escalating alerts.
Does that sound like it would be useful?
I like this feature and wouldn't mind having it, for many of the same reasons already echoed by others on the list.
Just so I understand, though, an ack by a person only prevents alerts from being sent out to other in their same level. Some one above or below still gets them, unless they ack the alert themselves?
Say a level 1 guy acks the alert. It still goes to 0 & 2, right? Or would it just go to 2 and no longer to 0?
Tom
participants (3)
-
henrik＠hswn.dk
-
stefan_loos＠hotmail.com
-
tgeorgoulias＠mcclatchy.com