I was doing some testing as we're working on our upgrade to Zabbix V7 and I'm just doing the implementation testing.
One thing I found that I can't work out how to work around is the proxy failover from the agent perspective.
We have 3 proxies in a proxy group, and the agent is configured with `ServerActive=zpx01;zpx02;zpx03` .
Client intially connected to zpx01 - deliberately take the server offline and due to a network issue zpx03 was offline to the agent (although the server could communicate to it).
Client does the next logical thing and tries to talk to zpx02 - can see in the proxy logs. But because Zabbix had 'moved' the proxy it was monitored by to zpx03, it never failed over to zpx02, even though it can talk to it.
This seems like it's a one and done type coding. If a client has three proxies, I'd expect it to try and talk to all proxies, and all proxies to be able to talk to it, but looks like Zabbix code is a bit simple.
Am I doing something or that's just 'the way it is currently?'
One thing I found that I can't work out how to work around is the proxy failover from the agent perspective.
We have 3 proxies in a proxy group, and the agent is configured with `ServerActive=zpx01;zpx02;zpx03` .
Client intially connected to zpx01 - deliberately take the server offline and due to a network issue zpx03 was offline to the agent (although the server could communicate to it).
Client does the next logical thing and tries to talk to zpx02 - can see in the proxy logs. But because Zabbix had 'moved' the proxy it was monitored by to zpx03, it never failed over to zpx02, even though it can talk to it.
This seems like it's a one and done type coding. If a client has three proxies, I'd expect it to try and talk to all proxies, and all proxies to be able to talk to it, but looks like Zabbix code is a bit simple.
Am I doing something or that's just 'the way it is currently?'