I update to NET-SNMP version 5.6.1 but i get the same behavior. I use the generated code from with mib2c tool and i use the table handler with specific 'iteration hook' routines generated by mib2c -c mib2c.iterate.conf. I also implemented the same table with a row-data storage table handler and i get the same behavior.
Tables which are part of the standard agent works correctly. I suppose but i don't no exactly there is a problem within the netsnmp_extract_iterator_context function, because if i do more then one GET-Requests in series and there is a oid which is not part of the table then the snmpd crash in this function, anyway there will no further debug statements printed within the table handler after the call of function netsnmp_extract_iterator_context(request) in this case. I hope this helps for further discussion. I coud give you also the part of the MIB - file and the associated code. Norman -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:15:52 +0000 > Von: Dave Shield <d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk> > An: normanrae...@gmx.de > CC: net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Betreff: Re: multiple snmpget on tables > On 16 March 2011 15:03, <normanrae...@gmx.de> wrote: > > i mean issuing a series of individual GET requests > > for entries within a single table with 1 row and 8 presented columns. > > OK. > > > > I get differen results between series of individual GET requests > > for entries within a single table and single GET requests on same > entries within the table. > > Hmmm... that definitely sounds wrong. > > > > When I send the following > > snmpget -c public 192.168.10.146 inspektor.3.3.1.1.0x8801 > inspektor.3.3.1.2.0x8801 > > inspektor.3.3.1.3.0x8801 inspektor.3.3.1.4.0x8801 > inspektor.3.3.1.5.0x8801 > > inspektor.3.3.1.6.0x8801 inspektor.3.3.1.7.0x8801 > inspektor.3.3.1.8.0x8801 > > [snip] > > I presume this is a module that you have implemented yourself. > Do you get similar problems with other tables > (e.g. those that are part of the standard agent). > > If the problem is confined to this one table, then I'd suspect that it's a > bug > in the code that implements this particular table. We'd really have to > see > this code in order to make any suggestions. > > If it's a more widespread problem, then that would be more worrying. > Which version of the agent are you using? > > Dave -- NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen! Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ 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
