I am being able to generate a notification on behalf of an user that don't even have a VACM entry. I think the checking is not implemented or is not working properly. I looked at the code and I could not find any part where the checking was being performed. Any clue?
Pablo > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Shield > Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 12:31 PM > To: Passera Pablo-APP015; Wes Hardaker > Cc: net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: vacm notification access > > On 30/03/07, Wes Hardaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>>> "PP" == Passera Pablo-APP <Passera> writes: > > > > PP> I have a question related to how VACM is implemented in > the agent. > > PP> Is the notify-view parameter in the access token being > used when > > PP> the agent generates a notification? > > > > It should be, yes. > > According to the RFC specs, it should be, yes. > But in practice, I'm not convinced. > > If you set up a very basic snmpd.conf access configuration > (with a single "rocommunity" line and nothing else), then > walking the vacmAccessTable will show a value of 'none' > for the notifyGroupName. > > But the agent will still generate traps quite happily. > > Dave > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
