On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:13:25 -0400 Robert Story <rst...@freesnmp.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:10:01 -0800 Stephen wrote: > SH> > The netlink one is a bit problematic, in that it unconditionally > replaces the > SH> > old code, and we need to support older systems which might not have > netlink. > SH> > Is there some header/constant we can check for that will indicate > whether or > SH> > not we can get the route table via netlink? > SH> > SH> I don't think keeping old code is necessary since netlink has been around > SH> since linux 2.2 (1999) and netlink is already used in if-mib and > etherlike-mib. > > Yes, but if I recall correctly, it is used to augment existing methods, not to > replace them. As for kernel support, a vendor trying to fit a custom kernel in > an embedded device might not enable netlink support in the kernel to save > space. The code in agent/mibgroup/if-mib/data_access/interface_linux.c uses netlink for prefix listen and ether-like mib uses it for subscriptions. Netlink is not a configuration option in Linux (even for embedded) it would require major surgery to remove it. It is possible to keep both methods but the non netlink one would be subject to disuse and bit rot. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
