Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Flatly)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

NetXMS Forum

  1. Home
  2. Support
  3. Node down vs Node is unreachable by ICMP

Node down vs Node is unreachable by ICMP

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Support
13 Posts 4 Posters 71.1k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • E
    E
    Egert143
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Hello

    Could someone please explain how is it decided what error is displayed when node is down?

    For example when node is really down, no network connectivity etc, sometimes Netxms shows status as Node down, other times as unreachable by icmp and sometimes both. What is deciding factor in there?

    Also for icmp down it seems very sensitive, maybe 1 packet is lost and status is already unreachable.

    Egert

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • V
      V
      Victor Kirhenshtein
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Hi,

      there are two independent polls that produce those two events. One is status poll, that checks node connectivity using agent, SNMP, and finally ICMP if neither SNMP agent nor NetXMS agent are responding. This poll can generate events SYS_SNMP_UNREACHABLE, SYS_AGENT_UNREACHABLE, SYS_NODE_UNREACHABLE, and SYS_NODE_DOWN. Difference between SYS_NODE_UNREACHABLE and SYS_NODE_DOWN is that "unreachable" generated when server can detect network failure between itself and target node.
      Another poll is ICMP poll, it was added in version 4.0. It's main use is to do regular ICMP pings and collect response time and packet loss statistic. In addition, it will generate event SYS_ICMP_UNREACHABLE when node is not responding to ICMP. If that happen after SYS_NODE_DOWN then ICMP unreachable event will be correlated to node down event, but because those two types of poll run asynchronously it is possible that node became actually unreachable after last status poll run and before next ICMP poll run, thus generating ICMP unreachable event that cannot be correlated to node down event.
      You can effectively hide those ICMP unreachable events by disabling or removing rules that generate alarms from them, and unchecking "write to event log" option in event template configuration for SYS_ICMP_UNREACHABLE and SYS_ICMP_OK.

      Best regards,
      Victor

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • E
        E
        Egert143
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Thanks for the explanation.

        Is it possible to adjust icmp polling parameters to accept more ping loss before saying icmp unreachable? I adjusted PingTimeout from 1500 to 3000 but it doesent change much.

        Egert

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • S
          S
          Storm-Donovan
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Hi Egert,

          I had the same issue with Nodes Unreachable by ICMP.  Victor and I determined that the ICMP poll was ignoring the server setting for PollCountForStatusChange (mine is set to 5 and it alarmed on one missed ping).  I believe they are working on fixing this.  Until that happens, I just disabled the Event Processing Policy.

          Cheers,
          Donovan.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • E
            E
            Egert143
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Thank for the info! Will be waiting for fix then. 🙂

            Egert

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • D
              D
              dreamscape
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Can I ask if this is still an issue please, our system will report in this order for example for most devices on a regular basis?

              09:41:32 - SYS_ICMP_UNREACHABLE
              09:41:32 - SYS_NODE_MAJOR
              09:42:34 - SYS_ICMP_OK
              09:42:34 - SYS_NODE_NORMAL

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • D
                D
                dreamscape
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Hi, Does anyone know please??

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • V
                  V
                  Victor Kirhenshtein
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Hi,

                  problem with ICMP polls ignoring "poll count for status change" was fixed. Do you have poll count set to more than 1 and still get regular ICMP unreachable?

                  Best regards,
                  Victor

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • D
                    D
                    dreamscape
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Hi Victor,

                    Sorry I didn't see you had commented.

                    I've upped my poll count from the default of 1 to 2 but i'm still getting these messages?

                    See below

                    ICMP.jpg

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • V
                      V
                      Victor Kirhenshtein
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Can you try to set debug level to 7 for tag poll.icmp, and when problem repeats, send me extract from the server log filtered by object name?

                      Best regards,
                      Victor

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • D
                        D
                        dreamscape
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        Hi Victor,

                        Please see below for one client, went unreachable, major at 09:58:23, back to normal 10:00:42

                        Thanks
                        Nick

                        2023.05.31 09:56:11.912 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 09:56:11.912 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=0

                        2023.05.31 09:57:16.994 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 09:57:18.292 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=2 RTT=0

                        2023.05.31 09:58:22.612 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 09:58:23.800 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=2 RTT=0

                        2023.05.31 09:59:33.326 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 09:59:33.326 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=2

                        2023.05.31 10:00:42.308 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 10:00:42.308 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=0

                        2023.05.31 10:01:52.415 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 10:01:52.415 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=1

                        2023.05.31 10:02:57.539 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 10:02:57.539 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=0

                        2023.05.31 10:04:02.641 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 10:04:02.641 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=0

                        2023.05.31 10:05:07.675 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: calling IcmpPing(192.168.1.85,3,1500,46)

                        2023.05.31 10:05:07.675 *D* [poll.icmp          ] Node::icmpPollAddress(GARDENW10-1 [14138], PRI, 192.168.1.85):: ping status=0 RTT=0

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • V
                          V
                          Victor Kirhenshtein
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          According to log server got two timeouts - at 09:57:18 and 09:58:23 (status=2 means timeout). Next ping was successful again. Do you think there was a possibility of network issues at that time that could cause loss of ICMP packets? Also, if you change poll count to 3 or 4, will it fix the situation?

                          Best regards,
                          Victor

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • D
                            D
                            dreamscape
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            Hi Victor,

                            Thanks for the reply, I'm unsure on network issues, it's small, around 50 switches.

                            Will increases the poll count to 3 and see.

                            Thanks
                            Nick

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0

                            Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                            Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                            With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                            Register Login
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • Users
                            • Groups