On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:41:47 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> Quoting Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
DS> > DS> I never much liked the 'data/dataset' names anyway.
DS> > DS> If we're going to change them, I'd like a say in what to!
DS> >
DS> > I can pretty much guarantee that there won't be any issue with
Hi,
I want to know whether net-snmp package supports RFC2233 MIB? If not, could you please tell me, if I want to implement/support RFC2233 using net-snmp then how should I go about doing it? Do I have to implement it from scratch?
From scratch here I mean using net-snmp library of course, but j
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:41:47 +0100, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I think this was an executive decision by Wes because:
>>
>> 1) the table token was broken
>> 2) no easy way to fix 1 in container version
>> 3) work influences needed a working cvs, ASAP
>> 3) new container version
On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 16:57, Robert Story wrote:
> I believe so. I seem to recall that it broke the snmpd.conf 'table' token.
> Wes also pointed out that anyone wanting to look at the data itself would have
> been using the linked list pointers, thus breaking backwards compatibility.
Hmmm wher
Wes,
I'm just getting back up to speed with what's changed
with the development code during my sabbatical, and noticed
that you've backed out the container-based "table_data"
helper, moving this into a separate helper.
The CVS commit message mentions problems with backward
compatibility - can
Quoting Robert Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> DS> Hmmm where was this discussed?
>
> I think this was an executive decision by Wes because:
>
> 1) the table token was broken
> 2) no easy way to fix 1 in container version
> 3) work influences needed a working cvs, ASAP
> 3) new container version
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:29:44 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> I'm just getting back up to speed with what's changed
DS> with the development code during my sabbatical, and noticed
DS> that you've backed out the container-based "table_data"
DS> helper, moving this into a separate helper.
DS>
DS> The CVS c
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:03:33 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 16:57, Robert Story wrote:
DS> > I believe so. I seem to recall that it broke the snmpd.conf 'table'
DS> > token.
DS>
DS> Hmmm where was this discussed?
I think this was an executive decision by Wes because:
1) the tabl
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:12:42 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> > Neither, really. These particular tests are trying to access every object
DS> > in the RFC-1213 MIB, using v1, v2c and v3. The two 'failure' cases are
DS> > two tables that aren't implemented in the agent.
DS>
DS> I'm sure these tables used to b
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:20:55 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 18:18, Wes Hardaker wrote:
DS> > 5) thus, I would choose one of:
DS> >a) have the new behaviour to probe later with a new flag to probe
DS> >immed.
DS>
DS> Well, we've already got a flag to do this (sort of).
DS> It's
On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 18:14, Shobana Sampath wrote:
> The documentation says this agent_addr is for v1 traps
> and since I send out v2c traps
Well, SNMPv2 traps don't have the same structure as v1
traps, so there isn't an 'agent_addr' header field at all.
Inserting one would immediately break ever
11 matches
Mail list logo
