On 14/09/2012 10:57, Stephen Davies wrote: > Chris, > I think you have had a better experience with SNMP than I am currently > having. > You asked about the 'can of worms' relating to Polling for SNMP Traps.
I don't mean to pick nits, but you don't poll for traps. Traps are sent by the device without being requested; you poll for data by sending 'get' requests to the device with the OIDs you want it to return. The communications channel is different for the two mechanisms: get/set requests are sent to the device usually on port 161, traps are sent from the device to the configured recipient usually on port 162. > The IPTV devices we are polling sometimes don't even respond within 30 > seconds. Nasty. Are you sure the network is reliable, bearing in mind SNMP usually uses UDP, which is unreliable? > The 5 servers are supposed to respond with the same data. They don't. > Why? They are running different firmware and the supplier is very very > very reluctant to make them identical. > Another SNMP emitter has been configured incorrectly. To get it fixed, a > guy will have to come from Bahrain. He will remove the unit and then > ship it to India where sometime in the next month they might possibly > correct the problem, ship it back and we can try again. > > > Not a happy bunny especially as it is the weekend here and I'm stuck in > the basement of the airport wearing ear defenders trying to keep the > incessant fire alarms from slowly driving me mad. It certainly doesn't sound pleasant and I sympathise, but to be fair the issues you raise seem to be with the devices and the suppliers. Nothing you've said so far is really the fault of SNMP. Regards, Chris -- Chris Smith <cj...@zepler.net>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --------------------------------------------------------------
