On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 10:29 +0100, Peder Chr. Norgaard wrote: > The monitoring solution is inherently a terrible inefficient way of > generating data for what is basically an alarm: you face an unholy choice > between heavy load even when everything is OK, and large delay in being > told that something is wrong.
Agreed. I recently suggested to Robert that he should incorporate the detection of linkUp/Down events directly into his new if-mib data access routines. Strictly speaking, that's still a monitoring solution, but is much more focused (and more efficient) than the more general DisMan-based mechanism. But I'm not sure whether Robert has had a chance to investigate this possibility yet, and it's certainly not part of any released version. (Which is why I didn't mention it to Siddesh) An alert-driven approach (e.g. netlink) would perhaps be worth investigating as well. Robert, are you listening? Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
