On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 21:57 -0800, Wes Hardaker wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:19:27 +0000, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>> said: > > >> (which clearly shows that VACM Authorization is required for > >> applications generating notification) > > Dave> You are quite correct - the agent doesn't not conform to this > Dave> particular aspect of RFC 3415. > > Hmm... thought 3.5 did... Robert?
I would be *very* surprised if 3.5 supported any such filtering :-) Release 5.3 seems to include support for the snmpNotifyFilterTable, but that's not quite the same thing. A strict application of RFC 3415 should check all outgoing traps against vacmAccessNotifyViewName - as well as any additional (optional) filtering. Now I haven't examined the new code in great detail, but it doesn't seem to do this. Robert? Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-users mailing list Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
