Hello list,
when playing around with bitstrings, I found a small bug in
net-snmp-5.7.1/snmplib/mib.c
in function sprint_realloc_bitstring:
---------8<----------
for (; enums; enums = enums->next) {
if (enums->value == (len * 8) + bit) {
enum_string = enums->label;
break;
}
}
---------8<----------
The snippet above assumes that all bits are enumerated in an ascending
order. But, Cisco
has a mib (CISCO-QOS-PIB-MIB) that enumerates
QosInterfaceTypeCapabilities in a random
order:
---------8<----------
QosInterfaceTypeCapabilities ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"An enumeration of interface capabilities. Used by the PDP to
select policies and configuration to push to the PEP."
SYNTAX BITS {
unspecified (0),
-- Classification support
inputL2Classification (1), inputIpClassification (2),
outputL2Classification (3), outputIpClassification (4),
inputPortClassification (19), outputPortClassification (20),
-- Policing support
inputUflowPolicing (5), inputAggregatePolicing (6),
outputUflowPolicing (7), outputAggregatePolicing (8),
policeByMarkingDown (9), policeByDropping (10),
inputUflowShaping (21), inputAggregateShaping (22),
outputUflowShaping (23), outputAggregateShaping (24),
-- Supported scheduling mechanisms
fifo (11), wrr (12), wfq (13), cq (14), pq (15), cbwfq (16),
pqWrr (25), pqCbwfq (26),
-- Supported congestion control mechanisms
tailDrop (17), wred (18)
}
---------8<----------
When I run my little program that prints out all bits using
snmp_varlist_add_variable
and snprint_variable:
---------8<----------
/* val is a pointer to an u_char string */
snmp_varlist_add_variable (&vars, name, name_length,
ASN_BIT_STR, (u_char *)val, val_size);
snprint_variable (n, sizeof (n), name, name_length,
vars);
printf ("test vars: %s\n", n);
snmp_free_varbind(vars);
---------8<----------
It outputs:
$ ./snmpt
test vars: CISCO-QOS-PIB-MIB::qosInterfaceTypeCapabilities = BITS: FF
FF FF E0 00 unspecified(0) inputL2Classification(1)
inputIpClassification(2) outputL2Classification(3)
outputIpClassification(4) inputUflowPolicing(5)
inputAggregatePolicing(6) outputUflowPolicing(7)
outputAggregatePolicing(8) policeByMarkingDown(9) policeByDropping(10)
fifo(11) wrr(12) wfq(13) cq(14) pq(15) cbwfq(16) tailDrop(17) wred(18)
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
When I put these bits in ascending order in the MIB, it outputs the
following:
$ ./snmpt
test vars: CISCO-QOS-PIB-MIB::qosInterfaceTypeCapabilities = BITS: FF
FF FF E0 00 unspecified(0) inputL2Classification(1)
inputIpClassification(2) outputL2Classification(3)
outputIpClassification(4) inputUflowPolicing(5)
inputAggregatePolicing(6) outputUflowPolicing(7)
outputAggregatePolicing(8) policeByMarkingDown(9) policeByDropping(10)
fifo(11) wrr(12) wfq(13) cq(14) pq(15) cbwfq(16) tailDrop(17) wred(18)
inputPortClassification(19) outputPortClassification(20)
inputUflowShaping(21) inputAggregateShaping(22) outputUflowShaping(23)
outputAggregateShaping(24) pqWrr(25) pqCbwfq(26)
Which is correct and should be the output for both situations of
course...
T
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LogMeIn Central: Instant, anywhere, Remote PC access and management.
Stay in control, update software, and manage PCs from one command center
Diagnose problems and improve visibility into emerging IT issues
Automate, monitor and manage. Do more in less time with Central
http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein12331_d2d
_______________________________________________
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
