Pete> When the agent is configured to PROXY a portion of the MIB, is it Pete> necessary that all of the varbinds in a PDU refer to objects in the Pete> OID branch that the target (forwarded-to) agent is to handle?
Dave> Which PDU are you referring to? The incoming request (no), or Dave> the one forwarded to the proxied subagent (yes)? Wes> Actually, our proxy is more flexible than the one defined in the Wes> SNMPv3 architecture documents. It would actually be no in both cases. Indeed. I was answering based on the behaviour of our agent (which seemed to be what Pete was asking about). Wes> The proxy defined there passes the entire PDU without Wes> modification... I think ours is better, however. I've actually just finished the latest revision of a discussion about different understandings of what is meant by "proxy" handling, which uses the terms "proxy forwarding" (for the SNMPv3-specs style) and "proxy delegation" (for our approach). I was going to ask DavidP about this, but you might know - with the "pure" proxy forwarding approach, and an authenticated SNMPv3 request - which agent is responsible for authenticating the request? The proxying (intermediate) agent, or the proxied (far end) agent? (This would also presumably affect things like the authoritative engine ID, and the boot count/time values) Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
