On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 15:20:52 -0700 Garrett wrote:
> GC> The OS-dependent code is messy and my personal feeling is
> GC> that it should be properly refactored to avoid , and antiquated OS
> GC> support should be removed (FreeBSD 5.x has been dea
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 15:20:52 -0700 Garrett wrote:
GC> The OS-dependent code is messy and my personal feeling is
GC> that it should be properly refactored to avoid , and antiquated OS
GC> support should be removed (FreeBSD 5.x has been dead for some time for
GC> instance, and FreeBSD 6.x is no longer
On 6 July 2011 08:01, Dennis Cua wrote:
> I know snmp get next takes the next OID not the current.
Pretty much, yes.
It takes a given OID (which may or may not refer to an actual
instance), and returns the next valid instance.
For example, given an integer-based table, rooted at .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.
To Whom It May Concern,
Good day, I'm fairly new to snmp and currently tackling some
maintenance and bug fix tasks on our snmp agent. I think I failed to
see snmp get bulk or some similar bulk command documentation. I know
snmp get next takes the next OID not the current. Is snmp get bulk
sim
