On 10 February 2010 20:04, Fulko Hew <[email protected]> wrote: > Recently while debugging someones implementation of my MIB, I saw that > they were sending the varbind list in a different sequence than was > described (implicitly) by my VARIABLES clauses.
No - that's not valid. >From RFC 2578: 8.1. Mapping of the OBJECTS clause The OBJECTS clause, which need not be present, defines an ordered sequence of MIB object types. One and only one object instance for each occurrence of each object type must be present, and in the specified order, in every instance of the notification. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You can add extra varbinds to the *end* of the payload of the notification, but it must contain the specified varbinds - exactly as specified. (That document describes the current SMIv2 syntax, but I believe the same applies to the old, obsolete SMIv1 MIBs) Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SOLARIS 10 is the OS for Data Centers - provides features such as DTrace, Predictive Self Healing and Award Winning ZFS. Get Solaris 10 NOW http://p.sf.net/sfu/solaris-dev2dev _______________________________________________ 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
