[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4099?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16071261#comment-16071261
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-4099:
--------------------------------------

Github user trkurc commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1941#discussion_r125163015
  
    --- Diff: 
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-snmp-bundle/nifi-snmp-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/snmp/processors/SNMPWorker.java
 ---
    @@ -47,7 +46,7 @@
          * @param snmp instance of {@link Snmp}
          * @param target instance of {@link AbstractTarget}
          */
    -    public SNMPWorker(Snmp snmp, AbstractTarget target) {
    +    protected SNMPWorker(Snmp snmp, AbstractTarget target) {
    --- End diff --
    
    I noticed a few public->private changes as well throughout the PR. While I 
can't argue that the access modifier you went with would have been the best 
initial choice, making a change back from public can break other people's code, 
even if it isn't in NiFi now (in other words, the changes are a public API 
change).


> SNMP processors cannot be restarted with SNMPv3 & security
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NIFI-4099
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4099
>             Project: Apache NiFi
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Extensions
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Lars Francke
>            Assignee: Lars Francke
>              Labels: snmp
>
> The SNMP processors currently fail when stopped & started again because 
> snmpTarget is not set to null and only if it is are the user credentials 
> added to the current USM/Engine.
> So what happens is that SNMP4j complains that there is no username.
> I'll provide a patch that fixes this.
> In addition I'd like to update SNMP4J from the version that's being used 1.x 
> (from 2009) to 2.5.6 from 2017. And I'd love to also do a code cleanup run. 
> I'd prefer to have it all in one patch (it still won't be large) but if 
> really needed I can separate it out into three patches.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to