> But you can't index a table by itself.
> I think you need to look again at your MIB definitions.
Thanks Dave, I have had another look at this and now realise the errors in
my (mis)understanding.
> > So why does snmpwalk (and HP OpenView NNM ) report the extra appended
> > .0's as follows?:
> No idea.
> The MIB dump above looks bogus, but this output is really down to the
> code that you're written to implement the MIB. Without a little more
> detail about what code you've actually got, it's impossible to tell
> why the output is warped in this way.
>
> Dave
I was incorrectly using the function netsnmp_table_helper_add_indexes() but
now that I have modified the code I see a sensible printout when traversing
a table.
On another note I have a question that which is more in the domain of the
net-snmp-coders list (which i will place there now) concerning an apparent
error with the table_iterator functions { get_first, get_next, free_data,
free_loop_at_end}
Cheers,
Mark
(Sorry about the unnecessary email footer)
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
