Hi Dave, Alex, everyone,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Shield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 7:00 PM
> To: Vic Berdin
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: MAC address not retrieved by Win32 client
>> Here are more details:
>> If I will run `snmpwalk` from my Linux machine, I can definitely
>> see the line:
>>
>> "RFC1213-MIB::ifPhysAddress.2 = Hex-STRING: 00 90 73 00 02 F5"
> Is that the same box as the agent is running on, or a different one?
> It's worth checking you can see things from a "remote" system,
> as well as the local one.
VIC: It's the same box. I've just tried your suggestion, and my other
Linux machine (vmware actually) was able to get the physical address.
And incidentally, after reading another response from Alex, I tried
the Win32 based net-snmp, and yep, snmpwalk from this net-snmp flavor
can also retrieve physical address values.
>> It's also highly possible that snmputilg does not support
>> physical addresses (*shrugs*).
> Seems unlikely, to be honest.
> Such tools typically work with raw OIDs, and don't care about what
> the values actually mean.
>> Btw, what other FREE Win32 client tools that you guys use, in order
>> to get/set information to your net-snmp servers?
> Well personally, I tend to use the Net-SNMP client applications
> on all systems, including windows boxes. (Not that I use windows
> kit much). But I'd be fairly surprised if this made a difference.
> It's much more likely to be an access control problem.
>> Also, here's my test conf, please feel free to send flames:
>>
>> #---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> # sec.name source community
>> com2sec local 172.0.0.1 public
>> com2sec mynetwork 0.0.0.0/0 public
> Is that a typo for "127.0.0.1" ?
> Otherwise the access control stuff looks OK.
VIC: It is a typo on my actual config. I already changed it, but the
problem remains
> (I'd have used "default" rather than "0.0.0.0/0" but it
> probably works the same).
> You don't need all three of the following:
>> trapsink 127.0.0.1
>> trap2sink 127.0.0.1
>> informsink 127.0.0.1
> since that will generate *three* copies of every trap you send,
> but that's not relevant to this problem.
VIC: So that's what it means! I've made a script just to see if my trap
daemon can indeed detect coldStart. The script simply echoes to a
file. And to my amazement, three entries are always gets created.
Thanks for this one!
BTW, how do you actually test warmStart, linkUp, and linkDown?
> Another thought - are you *sure* that this is the snmpd.conf file
> that's being read. If you're running a pre-installed version
> of the agent, then that will typically be looking in somewhere like
> /etc/snmp/snmpd.conf rather than /usr/local/etc/snmp/snmpd.conf
VIC: This is indeed the active config. I have this on my rc start-up
script:
"-c /usr/local/share/snmp/snmp.conf"
...and this as my trapd option:
"-f -Le -c /usr/local/share/snmp/snmptrapd.conf"
> Try deliberately putting an invalid token into the config file
> and restarting the agent. It should log an error.
VIC: No need. I've had obvious errors on this config before. And the
error does get logged in /var/log/messages. At present, my "messages"
log is free from snmpd errors.
VIC: I really have no more ideas at this point on how to resolve this.
Since another Linux machine and the Win32 net-snmp can retrieve the MAC
values from the server, I'm bent on believing that snmputilg.exe has
problems...
************
However:
************
I also would like to inform the list that SilverCreek spurs out a lot
of TimeOut errors from this server and config. Out of 79 tests for v2c,
I get:
- 52 passed tests, 23 failures, 3 warnings, and 1 uninnitiated test due
to dependencies on previous failed tests.
- For v1, almost half of the test failed (22 failures & 3 warings out
of 51 tests).
- I haven't started testing v3 yet.
Can this be interpreted that net-snmp has its own means of getting
things done? Or isn't really/fully RFC compliant? :o(
To those who may be interested, I can give you a zipped copy of the
errors I'm getting. But for starters, here's a snip of one of my saved
logs:
I really wonder what does this error on "Index" value mean. I'm getting
lines
and lines of these errors/warnings, along with write problems
eventhough
`snmpset` works fine from a Linux client.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
[WARNING] Remarks: Possible problems in set-request operation
Agent returned out of range error-index value
The error-index value in a Reponse-PDU with an error-status of notWritable
must be between 1 and the number of varbinds in the request. Instead, an
error-index of 0 was received, which does not correspond to any of the 2
variable binding(s).
Received Message Data {
Error-Status: notWritable,
Error-Index : 0,
Bindings {
sysDescr.0,
DisplayString,
"My Machine"
sysContact.0,
DisplayString,
"zxiv1001 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
}
}
"
[FAILED] Remarks: Agent returned wrong error-index
Received Message Data {
Error-Status: notWritable,
Error-Index : 0,
Bindings {
sysDescr.0,
DisplayString,
"My Machine"
sysContact.0,
DisplayString,
"zxiv1001 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
}
}
[WARNING] Remarks: Possible problems in set-request operation
Agent returned out of range error-index value
The error-index value in a Reponse-PDU with an error-status of notWritable
must be between 1 and the number of varbinds in the request. Instead, an
error-index of 0 was received, which does not correspond to any of the 2
variable binding(s).
Received Message Data {
Error-Status: notWritable,
Error-Index : 0,
Bindings {
sysDescr.0,
DisplayString,
"My Machine"
sysName.0,
DisplayString,
"Machine Sys"
}
}
"
[FAILED] Remarks: Agent returned wrong error-index
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
arrrghh.... time to rest now...
Best regards,
Vic
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.672 / Virus Database: 434 - Release Date: 4/28/2004
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer
Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA
REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
