On 23 March 2010 13:15, Fatima Peter wrote:
> .. My understanding of the mask is "1 means that the oid
> tree is in view and "0" means not in view. Another colleague told me
> that "1" means that we need an exact match and "0" means the view does
> not care about the "oid" tree.
See RFC 3415,
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the input. I didn't know what "rocommunity global" does
and I will try retesting with rocommunity removed and post the
results.
But, it does not look like the results match the function of "vacm
mask", isn't it. My understanding of the mask is "1 means that the oid
tree is i
On 22 March 2010 15:20, Fatima Peter wrote:
> # sec.name source community
> com2sec test1 10.10.0.0/16 global
>
> rocommunity global
If you are running view tests using the community name "global",
then it's not really sensible to configure full access for this
community st
Hi Robert,
Find below snmpd.conf file followed by results of my test:
"
# First, map the community name (COMMUNITY) into a security name
# (local and mynetwork, depending on where the request is coming
# from):
#
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:06:52 -0700 Fatima wrote:
FP> Hi,
FP>We are using net-snmp version 5.5 and we have run into the vacm
FP> mask issue. We followed the example given in
FP> http://www.insanum.com/docs/vacm.html, namely:
FP>
FP> (A) subtree: 1.3.6.1.2.1
FP> mask: 1 1 1 1 1 1
FP> (B
Hi,
We are using net-snmp version 5.5 and we have run into the vacm
mask issue. We followed the example given in
http://www.insanum.com/docs/vacm.html, namely:
(A) subtree: 1.3.6.1.2.1
mask: 1 1 1 1 1 1
(B) subtree: 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.1
mask: 1 1 1
(C) subtree: 1.3.6.1.2.1.2
