Apinger headache. Why don't use httping to more than one site?

  • I frequently have packet loss monitoring gateways.

    I think ping is a problem to test a connection. It's very difficult to find sure IPs to ping. I tried near pinging as my public IPs, near IPs such many ISP gateways, Google public DNS, other public DNS but allways I finish having problems. I think many of the IPs pinged have their firewall rules and finish limiting the pings.

    About year 2000 I started using FreeBSD for servers. My internet connections were very poor and hanged frequently. I built an electronic watchdog (based on http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iesmajuelo.com%2F~infor%2FWatchDog%2F&act=url) that was capable to unplug/plug the ADSL router. This was automated with a script that used ping.

    But some time after I "upgraded" my script to httping, http://www.vanheusden.com/httping/

    With httping I tested 2-3 different websites and this permitted to guarantee if the connection was available or not.

    I think httping is better than ping or apinger in some situations.

  • I have nearly the same problems with apinger and agree with your statement. Maybe the developer team could recheck the apinger config and integrate a multiping (if possible).

  • Thanks for your answer!

    To minimize the problem I'm using the advanced options, putting ping each 10 seconds and down at 60 seconds. Please, see attached image.

    Is not an ideal situation but it helps to avoid false downs.

    ![Captura de 2014-07-10 09:48:11.png](/public/imported_attachments/1/Captura de 2014-07-10 09:48:11.png)
    ![Captura de 2014-07-10 09:48:11.png_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/Captura de 2014-07-10 09:48:11.png_thumb)

  • Yeah right. I did this some month ago.  ;) Sometimes the monitor ip is not responding.. :(

Log in to reply