Narayana Smaranas, Thanks a lot for your response.
Narayana Smaranas, Venkatesha. --- Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 09/04/07, K R Venkateshan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If that be the case, is the way the SET operation > > works changed from UCD-SNMP to NET-SNMP > > implementations ? > > It's not how SET operations per-se are handled that > has changed, > but how *AgentX* SET operations are handled. > > See > http://net-snmp.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/net-snmp/trunk/net-snmp/agent/mibgroup/agentx/protocol.c?r1=5289&r2=5431 > > for the relevant code change. (SVN revision 5431, > dated July 12th, 2001) > > The behaviour of the UCD agent (which sent a > response to the final Cleanup-Set > message) was wrong. The AgentX specs clearly state > that no response should > be sent following this message - see RFC 2741, > section 7.2.4.4. This error was > corrected for the Net-SNMPagent (certainly 5.1.x and > above - possibly > 5.0.x as well). > This stage is mapped into the COMMIT phase of the > {UCD,Net}-SNMP agent > SET processing when running as an AgentX subagent - > hence the behaviour you > are seeing. > > > Dave > Send a FREE SMS to your friend's mobile from Yahoo! Messenger. Get it now at http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
