On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 10:12:15PM +0100, joy wrote:
> * https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=91863 from 2014
>
> Even if all those devices have not been RFC-compliant
JFTR I had approached MikroTik about their issue, provided a test case and
tested a beta, and now with RouterOS 6.44
On Tue, Jan 01, 2019 at 01:42:23PM +0100, Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Fr, 28 Dez 2018, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Even if all those devices have not been RFC-compliant, I would still
> > say it's doubtful that the Net::SNMP approach of croaking with a
> > single opaque sentence -- and a code warning
Hi Josip!
On Fr, 28 Dez 2018, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Even if all those devices have not been RFC-compliant, I would still
> say it's doubtful that the Net::SNMP approach of croaking with a
> single opaque sentence -- and a code warning on top -- is the right
> thing to do.
So what's your
Hi,
If the logic is changed in line 2620 to assume empty _error to be a sign of
success, it would contradict the comment above that says "If another error
is returned, we assume that the synchronization has failed."
This might actually be a duplicate of
4 matches
Mail list logo
