On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 09:46 -0500, Jean-Sebastien Morisset wrote: > Excellent - thank you very much for your continued replies. > I don't know where you find the time,
No - neither do I. > In your example, would that mean a trap would never be sent, > even if the "procfix" command failed? Correct. "proc" and "procfix" have *nothing* to do with traps whatsoever. The only thing that does is "monitor", and it's completely arbitrary as to what MIB objects this reports on. > Is there a way to run the procfix and then > generate a trap if the proc is still missing afterwards No. The only possibility would be to wait for the monitor entry to probe the prError flag again (or to have some external management application do this instead). But proc/procfix have no involvement with traps at all. Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&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
