[resending from correct email] > The output of the pmc tool is still unstructured text. So to feed it into a > script I would still need to write an output parser of some sort and I would > have to guess that my parser covers all of the cases that the tool might > generate and I would have to assume that the output format doesn’t change. > This is what got me thinking about structuring the output format somehow in a > way that any tool could consume it.
Perhaps in that case a structured text option to pmc(8) would be useful and not too hard to add? Having said that I’d love to pmc factored out into a library, that would be very useful for my application. :) > I have no intention of breaking that. It’s useful to be able to read the logs > as a human. But if you have more than a few instances (think 100+ instances > running in a datacenter) then human reading all the logs is not a sustainable > solution. In that case, it’s much better if all the logs can be fed into a > central place and processed looking for anomalies and/or errors. You can access the management interface remotely I believe, although I don’t know anything about the authorisation model. Also a bit of googling of SNMP and PTP also turned up these: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260229575_SNMP_to_PTP_management_interface <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260229575_SNMP_to_PTP_management_interface> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8173 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8173> Cheers, Luke
_______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
