Vincent Bernat <ber...@luffy.cx> writes: ... > The patch is quite ugly since it modifies snmptrapd while it should > modify the transport logic but it is only here for demonstration > purpose. The code should be moved in snmpUDPIPv4BaseDomain.c. ... > Would such a feature acceptable for NetSNMP? I have googled a bit and > found an answer from Wes saying no:
Well, IMHO: 1) doing broadcast/multicast is dangerous and should be done with care, but there are useful reasons for doing so. 2) it can't be done with the existing security modules, and is thus insecure (without getting adding some sort of new msec-based security module). 3) it's certainly not standardized, but that's never bothered me before. 4) because of the above, I'd prefer to include it only as an option that can be turned on but is off by default. -- Wes Hardaker Please mail all replies to net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
