any ideas on this issue?
is TimeInterval defined as 0.1 seconds or seconds?
is snmpTargetAddrTimeout implemented correctly?
regards
Martin Perzl
Von:martin.pe...@rohde-schwarz.com
An: net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net,
Datum: 04.07.2013 15:00
Betreff:SNMP-TARGET-MIB::snmp
TimeInterval TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"A period of time, measured in units of 0.01
seconds."
::= INTEGER (0..2147483647)
On 07/12/2013 03:06 PM, martin.pe...@rohde-schwarz.com wrote:
TimeInterval TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"A period of time, measured in units of 0.01
seconds."
::= INTEGER (0..2147483647)
maybe 10 * 0.01 = 0.1 ?
On 07/12/2013 03:06 PM, martin.pe...@
that is what the definition says: measured in units of 0.01 seconds
in my case, I have set SNMP-TARGET-MIB::snmpTargetAddrTimeout, which is of
type TimeInterval to 1000
1000 * 0.01 = 10 , so the timeout should be 10 seconds
but in fact, informs are re-sent every 1 second instead of 10 seconds
Maybe tick of the kernel is changed. normally it is 100. From your
description, maybe it is 1000.
Would you like to tell me the kernel of your computer?
On 07/12/2013 03:37 PM, martin.pe...@rohde-schwarz.com wrote:
that is what the definition says: measured in units of 0.01 seconds
in my case,
the kernel is configured in tickless mode (CONFIG_NO_HZ=y) with a tickrate
of 250 HZ (CONFIG_HZ_250=y).
Does the kernel tickrate have an influence on net-snmp timing?
regards
Martin
Von:zhuyj
An: martin.pe...@rohde-schwarz.com,
Kopie: net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net, zhuyj
Da
