On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 12:55 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
> True, and not all our traps are in set/clear pairs, but there is
> increasing customer/marketing pressure to go the set/clear route.
> ("You sent a coldStart but where's the coldStop?")
It is a superficially tempting position to take.
In some ways, it's slightly surprising that there isn't
a standard "agentStopping" notification. In fact, the
NET-SNMP-AGENT-MIB defines just such a pair of traps:
nsNotifyStart (which we don't actually use)
and nsNotifyShutdown (which we do)
But it also defines also a third notification:
nsNotifyRestart
This doesn't have a corresponding "nsNotifyReStop"
trap - such a thing wouldn't really make sense.
The trap receiver would *always* receive these
in linked pairs:
nsNotifyReStop/ReStart/Stop/Start/Stop/Start
like a inexperienced driver at the wheel of a
clapped out banger!
> Openview has a way to associate a severity with a trap at the mgmt station
> but if you specify the severity in the MIB file it sets the default on load.
And there's no way to set such defaults apart from adding (proprietary)
markup to an (otherwise standard) MIB file? You can't achieve the
same effect using a separate configuration file?
In which case, I'd say that it's up to the vendor who supplied the
customer with OpenView, to provide suitably mangled versions of the
relevant MIB files. I don't think it's appropriate to expect all
other SNMP companies and developers to pander to this sort of
proprietary extension.
[I'd also say that such a design decision stinks!]
If HP wants to propose such markup as a standard extension, then
I'm sure the IETF would give such a suggestion the same attention
that it does for any other SNMP-related ideas.
> This saves time and effort for the Openview users who would otherwise
> have to configure this for every one of your traps. With this they can just
> adjust the one's they want to change. When you are receiving traps from
> lots of different vendors' equipment you look for anything that saves time.
Saving effort is definitely sensible.
If OpenView had (has?) an alternative mechanism for specifying
default trap severities, then it might be possible to include
a suitable file as part of the Net-SNMP distribution. (Though
such a configuration would perhaps be better maintained and
distributed by an OpenView-specific group)
But I'd be very wary of distributing non-standard MIBs, tailored
to the needs of one particular software application.
> I pretty much agree with everything you've said above. I've made many
> of the same arguments, myself. Unfortunately reason does not always
> prevail in commercial environments.
Why do you think I've spent the last twenty years at University? :-)
Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
