On 30/11/06, Dana Burns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If one was to implement the snmp-community-mib, would the following be a > reasonable approach?
I'll have a proper look at this tomorrow, but one thing immediately springs to mind: > - define formats for new snmpd.conf directives for each of the > implemented transports corrosponding to > the nonVolatile com2sec rows, e.g. comm2SecUdp, comm2SecUdp6, > comm2SecUnix, or a single > "commCommunity" with bits to specify the transport info (extensible?) I would definitely suggest the second approach - probably using the same syntax as for specifying transport end-points. Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
