On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Nir Simionovich <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nir.simionovich@gmail.com" target="_blank">nir.simionovich@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal">Hi All,<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Well, per Michael’s response on JIRA, I’m moving this discussion to the mailing list. <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> Here’s the thing – almost anyone who’s built a large scale Asterisk platform had used either<br>
Nagios or Icinga (or other) to monitor it. Normally, what you would to monitor Asterisk would <br>be to either use the shell to issue ‘asterisk –rx’ commands and parse the output. Or connect<br>to the manager, issue a similar command and parse the output again. <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What information can you not get using the AMI today that requires you to parse CLI output?</div><div><br></div><div>I'd rather see work go into adding manager commands with responses as needed. If you ever have to parse CLI output, that just means something is missing from the AMI (or you didn't know it was there).</div>
<div><br></div><div>-- </div><div>Russell Bryant</div></div></div>