Hi, Jeff.  Have you taken this idea (consistent timestamp handling)
 further ?
Discussion is good, and patches are appreciated, too!

Jeff Johnson wrote:
Back in April, Martin Carlsson of Lumentis observed in the thread
entitled "engineTime and abrupt timechanges" that changes to the system
time could prevent the agent from authenticating snmpv3 messages
(reference

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=8116151).  In a
subsequent message he proposes a patch which uses ticks since reboot via
'times()' instead of wall clock as the basis of the engineTime.  In June
in a different thread entitled "usmStatsNotInTimeWindows issues" Thomas
Anders showed an additional problem with the current engineTime
mechanism such that after an uptime of 248 days the engineTime
calculation overflows, also causing problems.  I recently encountered
the first problem (and my search of sourceforge turned up these
threads), so I incorporated Martin's solution, and it is working quite
nicely.

The reason I'm writing is that since then, I've been looking at other
portions of the net-snmp code which could also suffer when there are
abrupt changes in the system time.  Some of these are minor, such as
sysORTable code producing strange timestamps.  Others are potentially
very bad, including all of the table cache support.

Would it make sense to revisit all of the code which currently uses
system time and rewrite it to use a timebase that won't change when NTP
or other mechanism are used to modify the system clock?  Perhaps a
generic timestamp library?



/jeff





------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to