Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature

    Traffic Monitoring
    6
    13
    3.5k
    Loading More Posts
    • 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.
    • V
      verizu
      last edited by

      You can already achieve this with telegraf which has a ping feature

      Sergei_ShablovskyS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • Sergei_ShablovskyS
        Sergei_Shablovsky @verizu
        last edited by

        @verizu said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

        You can already achieve this with telegraf which has a ping feature

        Please give me link to some example?
        (In case I need the result as described in first post of this topic). Thank You!

        —
        CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
        Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
        (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • johnpozJ
          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @Sergei_Shablovsky
          last edited by johnpoz

          @sergei_shablovsky said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

          b) needs of separate UPS, separate display and spare parts for this monitoring server;
          c) needs to create (and maintain) special set of rules on pfSense to allow your separate monitoring machine be effective in measurement;
          d) increased bills of electricity cost (the server + ups + monitor + extra cooling spending on whole server room);

          None of those make any sense to me.. smokeping can run on some VM or docker on your already installed infrastructure or just native on some box you have running anyway. Why would it need its own ups? This could be the same ups your pfsense is on. Why would it need a display? Or just run it on a pi for example..

          Rules - so you don't allow ping anyway? Why would you block outbound ping? Even if you blocked it for your network, it would be 1 rule..

          If its running as vm or docker on something you have running anyway.. The added cost of running a few extra cpu cycles to run the vm/docker would be really nonexistent. Who doesn't have say their nas up 24/7? Or lets say ran it on a pi - the cost there is pennies.. Lets say the pi draws 3w - which is prob on the high end to be sure.. At like 12 cent per kwh your talking like 3 bucks for the whole year.. You don't have a pi to play with, I have a couple on the network ntp server, pihole.. And then a couple older ones on the shelf - you could run this on a pi zero with nic adapter for like 20$ ;)

          I don't see how any of your disadvantage should come into play to be honest.

          But nothing stopping anyone from creating a smokeping package for pfsense..

          a) doesn't really come into play either if running it on something already running as vm/docker/native - if nas fails that pretty significant issue for me, so not really adding any point of failure in anything if already running on something that is important to be running. If a docker shuts down for whatever reason - I get an email to check it, etc.

          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.11

          PPCMP Sergei_ShablovskyS 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • PPCMP
            PPCM @johnpoz
            last edited by

            Hello there,

            The question from @Sergei_Shablovsky is really interresting

            @johnpoz To resolve issue with ISP (I add to make that and it is not easy), you have to prove that the problem doesn't come from your own network, for that Smokeping need to be as close to WAN as possible, otherwise, the ISP will blame the routeur or your switch...
            In my case, I use a Rpi on which Smokeping is istalled because I have the chance to have multiple IP addresses in my WAN network, so I use one of them for the pfSense and one other for the Rpi
            But for those who have only one ip address, the problem is more complicated

            So I am agree with Sergei, it will be great and more ease to use if Smokeping is integreted in pfSense...

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • Sergei_ShablovskyS
              Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
              last edited by

              @johnpoz said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

              But nothing stopping anyone from creating a smokeping package for pfsense..

              Where am I able to read how to write packages EXACTLY for pfSense ?

              (Please, do not point me on classic packages for BSD writing docs, or suggesting to reverse engineering one of already existed in pfSense packages...;)

              —
              CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
              Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
              (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

              johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • johnpozJ
                johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @Sergei_Shablovsky
                last edited by

                @sergei_shablovsky

                https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/develop-packages.html

                An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.11

                Sergei_ShablovskyS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                  Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
                  last edited by

                  @johnpoz said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

                  @sergei_shablovsky

                  https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/develop-packages.html

                  Thank You!

                  I read this around a year ago, but cannot find something like templates, controls example, etc... May be more detailed description of pfSense package making exist somewhere?

                  —
                  CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                  Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                  (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                    Sergei_Shablovsky @johnpoz
                    last edited by

                    @johnpoz said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

                    @sergei_shablovsky said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

                    b) needs of separate UPS, separate display and spare parts for this monitoring server;
                    c) needs to create (and maintain) special set of rules on pfSense to allow your separate monitoring machine be effective in measurement;
                    d) increased bills of electricity cost (the server + ups + monitor + extra cooling spending on whole server room);

                    None of those make any sense to me.. smokeping can run on some VM or docker on your already installed infrastructure or just native on some box you have running anyway. Why would it need its own ups? This could be the same ups your pfsense is on. Why would it need a display? Or just run it on a pi for example..

                    Ok, I agree with You about monitor and UPS. But anyway a You need separate server with 2 PSU, etc...
                    Because based on data of Smokeping - Prometheus&Grafana&AlertManager come in action.
                    Let say, when one uplink degradate on 20-30%, remote admin immediately receive mobile notifications and also some changes (changing software settings, fire up and kill some services and servers, etc) within infrastructure started.

                    Rules - so you don't allow ping anyway? Why would you block outbound ping? Even if you blocked it for your network, it would be 1 rule..

                    I mean that measuring the uplinks and measuring the inside infrastructure - are very different tasks by goals: if something happened with ISP uplinks - we doing one bunch of actions, when something happened with inside servers or active network equipment- we doing totally another bunch of actions.
                    And also after some time, may be this monitoring would be divided on 2 separate servers. (We not talk here about tiny micro servers like Raspberry or nettops).

                    If its running as vm or docker on something you have running anyway.. The added cost of running a few extra cpu cycles to run the vm/docker would be really nonexistent. Who doesn't have say their nas up 24/7? Or lets say ran it on a pi - the cost there is pennies.. Lets say the pi draws 3w - which is prob on the high end to be sure.. At like 12 cent per kwh your talking like 3 bucks for the whole year.. You don't have a pi to play with, I have a couple on the network ntp server, pihole.. And then a couple older ones on the shelf - you could run this on a pi zero with nic adapter for like 20$ ;)

                    I don't see how any of your disadvantage should come into play to be honest.

                    a) doesn't really come into play either if running it on something already running as vm/docker/native - if nas fails that pretty significant issue for me, so not really adding any point of failure in anything if already running on something that is important to be running. If a docker shuts down for whatever reason - I get an email to check it, etc.

                    As I wrote before: the docked server not good for precisely monitoring, and the tiny server not able to keep monitoring + set of mgmt software (Prometheus, Grafana, AlertManager, etc... well known stack).

                    But nothing stopping anyone from creating a smokeping package for pfsense..

                    Where reading with GREAT samples about creating packages for ofSense ? ;)

                    —
                    CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                    Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                    (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

                    H 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • H
                      heper @Sergei_Shablovsky
                      last edited by

                      @sergei_shablovsky
                      https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports
                      has the sourcecode for the packages.

                      https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/develop-packages.html
                      https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/package-directories.html

                      Sergei_ShablovskyS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Sergei_ShablovskyS
                        Sergei_Shablovsky @heper
                        last edited by

                        @heper said in Your opinion about adding Smokeping for monitoring WAN and LAN links state as standard pfSense feature:

                        @sergei_shablovsky
                        https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports
                        has the sourcecode for the packages.

                        https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/develop-packages.html
                        https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/development/package-directories.html

                        Thanks You. I able to read official web. ;)

                        I just asking for OTHER great sources with examples :)

                        —
                        CLOSE SKY FOR UKRAINE https://youtu.be/_tU1i8VAdCo !
                        Help Ukraine to resist, save civilians people’s lives !
                        (Take an active part in public protests, push on Your country’s politics, congressmans, mass media, leaders of opinion.)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.