[ZBX-11368] agent.version / agent.hostname reporting wrong data Created: 2016 Oct 18  Updated: 2017 May 30  Resolved: 2016 Oct 18

Status: Closed
Project: ZABBIX BUGS AND ISSUES
Component/s: Server (S)
Affects Version/s: 3.2.1
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Incident report Priority: Minor
Reporter: Frank Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Won't fix Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified
Environment:

Ubuntu 14.04 / Packages from repo


Attachments: PNG File ZBX-11368.png     PNG File Zabbix agent template.png    

 Description   

After updating our Zabbix server to 3.2.1 some of our agents started to report the wrong agent.hostname and agent.version: that of the zabbix server itself!

Some of the agents running 3.0.5 now claim they are running 3.2.1 and that their hostname is that of our master. However, manually retrieving the keys via zabbix_get (from the master) results in the correct data being returned.

Both items are configured are type "Zabbix agent" (which is the default of the provided template AFAIK).



 Comments   
Comment by Aleksandrs Saveljevs [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

Could you please post some screenshots (with data, IP addresses, hostnames) and some shell commands that show the problem?

Comment by Frank [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

From the Zabbix server commandline:

monitoring01 ~ # zabbix_get -s agent007.example.com -k agent.hostname
agent007.example.com

monitoring01 ~ # zabbix_get -s agent007.example.com -k agent.version 
3.0.5

Installed pkgs on agent:

    ii  zabbix-agent                      1:3.0.5-1+trusty                                     amd64        Zabbix network monitoring solution - agent
    ii  zabbix-sender                     1:3.0.5-1+trusty                                     amd64        Zabbix network monitoring solution - sender

Latest data for agent in webinterface:

This view shows the master hostname & version instead of the one for the agent.

Comment by Frank [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

The thing the agents have in common is that they have been auto-discovered in the past (long time ago) and were added with 0.0.0.0 as Agent interface & no hostname.
Other agents on 3.0.5 with a hostname and/or IP set show the right details.

So it appears it will somehow default to the server's hostname + version in case the agent interface is not configured?

Comment by Frank [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

Confirmed: after correcting the Agent Interface settings the right values started showing up.

Comment by Aleksandrs Saveljevs [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

It seems that if we try to connect to 0.0.0.0, then localhost is used:

$ ping 0.0.0.0 -c 3
PING 0.0.0.0 (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.063 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.048 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.046 ms
...

So do you think there is anything to fix in Zabbix?

Comment by Frank [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

Zabbix should probably not do any "Zabbix Agent" checks for hosts that have 0.0.0.0 configured in their Agent Interfaces, perhaps turning the particular items to "Not Supported" instead? As-is it would result in invalid data being provided to Zabbix.

Another thing would be making sure the host autoregistration would not create the host with 0.0.0.0 but the actual (received) IP instead but that's a different issue.

Comment by Aleksandrs Saveljevs [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

Can you reproduce auto-registered hosts being created with 0.0.0.0?

Comment by richlv [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

auto-registered hosts being created with 0.0.0.0 - that might have been ListenIP set to 0.0.0.0 (redundant, agent already listens on all available interfaces by default)

as for 0.0.0.0 pointing to localhost, this was discussed a long time ago, and there was a suggestion to ignore such interfaces. but that is actually an operating system - try connecting to 0.0.0.0 with telnet or any other tool and see what you get...
it was decided to leave it as-is and let upstream (linux ) change it, if needed.

Comment by Aleksandrs Saveljevs [ 2016 Oct 18 ]

It seems like closing this issue as "Won't fix" would be a proper resolution according to the information above.

Generated at Mon Apr 07 15:14:24 EEST 2025 using Jira 9.12.4#9120004-sha1:625303b708afdb767e17cb2838290c41888e9ff0.