Hello Dave, That was quick and very informative. I will go through the RFCs again. Thanks.
Regards, Ashok On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Dave Shield <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25 October 2011 13:17, ashok kumar <[email protected]> wrote: >> While I am trying snmpset with -v1 and -v2c, I am getting different >> reasons for errors..... >> >> Why am I getting noSuchName for -v1? > > Because that is the defined behaviour for SNMPv1. > See RFC 1157, section 4.1.5, step (1) > > >> I believe the error reason should be noAccess as >> in the -v2 case. > > Except that 'noAccess' is not one of the SNMPv1 error reasons. > > From the definition of PDU in the same RFC (section 5): > > PDU ::= > SEQUENCE { > request-id > INTEGER, > > error-status -- sometimes ignored > INTEGER { > noError(0), > tooBig(1), > noSuchName(2), > badValue(3), > readOnly(4), > genErr(5) > }, > > Those are the only possible error responses. > 'noAccess' is not one of them. > > This was one of the changes introduced with SNMPv2 > > Dave > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly. Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-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
