(fixed from address to stop list complaining about non-member posts)
>
>> the output of the second snmpwalk command (from host002) is below -
>> just to show that it's not listing the first N ports, it seems to be a
>> random selection:
>
> Compare these results with the netstat output.
> What do the missing entries look like?
>
> What happens if you issue an "snmpget" request for one
> of the missing entries? Do you see anything or not?
>
snmpget request fails with "No such instance at this OID"..
However, there is a difference:
host001:~# netstat -lntp |grep 48109
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:48109 0.0.0.0:*
LISTEN 2220/httpd-api-gw
host002:~# netstat -lntp |grep 48109
tcp 0 0 :::48109 :::*
LISTEN 3007/httpd-api-gw
Different format for the listening port from netstat. It seems that
snmpd isn't exposing anything that is formatted in the way host002 is
doing it. The entries that are being exposed, are in the format that
host001 is using.
The versions of netstat are different on the two boxes (host002's is
newer) - could this be causing the issue with net-snmp? Does net-snmp
even use netstat or is that just another side effect that we are
seeing.
> Is anything being logged by the agent?
Nothing that I can see, and turning debug on produces so much output I
have no idea where to start.
Thanks
Simon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
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
