Well, yes and no. Initially I was behind a Linksys firewall that's doing PAT. Supposedly, there's a transparency setting in the Linksys that'll allow SNMP traffic through to the designated end device. Since I made the correct settings in the Linksys and I was still having the problem, I removed the Linksys completely and went with a public IP on a single machine. This didn't solve the problem either. I suppose that there's the possibility that I'm being natted somewhere along the carrier path, but if so, I assume it would show on the trace as either a private address or a *. All I see are publics.
Thanks, Craig At 01:04 PM 4/11/2002 -0400, you wrote: >As far as I know, SNMP does not work over NAT or PAT. Could you be getting >NATted or PATted somewhere along the way? > >Tim >CCIE 9015 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Craig Columbus >Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 12:31 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: OT Again: SNMP and TimeWarner Cable [7:41196] > > >Have any of you tried using SNMP to monitor routers / servers from inside >the Time Warner Cable Network? (Put aside the obvious security risks for >the moment.) > >I'm on the Time Warner Cable Network at home and I need to temporarily >install What's Up Gold at home to monitor a 3640. For some reason, I can't >connect. I thought that maybe it was a config issue on the router (I >didn't set it up), so I tried connecting to another router where I know >SNMP is configured properly and was still unable to connect. I thought >maybe it was a What'sUp Gold issue, so I tried the connection with >Solarwinds and was still unable to connect. Thinking it was a problem with >my Windows ME desktop, I repeated the same steps with a Windows XP machine >and still couldn't connect. >I then configured What'sUp on a 2000 machine machine in my NOC (a >completely separate ISP) to connect to the 3640 and had no problem >connecting. >I contacted Time Warner Cable and they swear that they're not blocking any >ports at all and that 161 and 162 should get through. I contacted the ISP >that serves the 3640 (in case they were blocking the cable network for some >reason) and supposedly they're not blocking any ports either. >Maybe I haven't had enough sleep lately, but if TW is telling the truth, >I'm stumped. Any ideas on this one? > >Thanks, >Craig Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41199&t=41196 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
