Hello,
Consider the following dump as a Response to a Get Request:
Received 125 bytes from UDP: [127.0.0.1]:161->[0.0.0.0]
0000: 30 7B 02 01 03 30 11 02 04 5B 70 9B 75 02 03 00 0{...0...[p.u...
0016: FF E3 04 01 01 02 01 03 04 2E 30 2C 04 0D 80 00 ..........0,....
0032: 1F 88 80 82 0B 53 2D 67 01 8A 4D 02 01 01 02 03 .....S-g..M.....
0048: 02 7B 92 04 03 77 65 73 04 0C DF 8B 2A FE 4A C5 .{...wes....*.J.
0064: 4C 33 63 A6 2C C8 04 00 30 33 04 0D 80 00 1F 88 L3c.,...03......
0080: 80 82 0B 53 2D 67 01 8A 4D 04 00 A2 20 02 04 67 ...S-g..M... ..g
0096: DB 56 C4 02 01 00 02 01 00 30 12 30 10 06 0A 2B .V.......0.0...+
0112: 06 01 02 01 5C 01 01 01 00 42 02 03 E8 ....\....B...
NOTIFICATION-LOG-MIB::nlmConfigGlobalEntryLimit.0 = Gauge32: 1000
It was produced with the following command:
$ snmpget -v3 -n "" -c public -u wes -a md5 -A setup_passphrase -l
authNoPriv -d localhost nlmConfigGlobalEntryLimit.0
While decoding (with my own tool) the message above, I met a constraint
error with ASN.1 describing SNMPv3 message.
The actual issue with request-id parameter inside PDU (see RFC 3416 for
ASN.1 definitions)
Received value (from dump):
request-id = 1742427844
ASN.1:
request-id INTEGER (-214783648..214783647)
You can see that may be in number = 214783647, 4 is missed. I.e.: should be
the following: 2147_4_83647
Is it error in RFC or in SNMP daemon implementation?
--
Thanks,
Mikhail
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
