Regarding string as index for tables
Hi, I am trying to implement a table having two index values both being strings. Could any one tell me how the getnext works especially when the indexes are string and that too in lexicographical order by example please ? Lets say the row one indexed by mike and hello Row 2 by amfi and chris Please feel free to take your own example. And I have two cases here, in the above example, Row 1's index starts with 'm' and Row 2's index starts with 'a', so does this work as I feel these are not lexicographically ordered or this should be other way around, amfi and chris as index for row1 and mike and hello for row2? How about varying lengths? And how are string compared lexicographically for SNMP if they are the index for table ( you may please take singe index for briefing and later double index) And also someone explain about ip address being index and how it getnext works on this too ? Really appreciate detailed answer.. Regards -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___ 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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
On 15 April 2010 09:08, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I am trying to implement a table having two index values both being strings.
Could any one tell me how the getnext works
It depends on exactly how the table is defined.
What is the INDEX clause from the MIB file?
Lets say the row one indexed by mike and hello
Row 2 by amfi and chris
Each string will be turning into a sequence of individual ASCII characters.
So the index for row 1 will probably be
4.'m'.'i'.'k'.'e'.5.'h'.'e'.'l'.'l'.'o'
and for row 2
4.'a'.'m'.'f'.'i'.5.'c'.'h'.'r'.'i'.'s'
Note that each string is preceded by its length.
If the INDEX clause looks like { index1, IMPLIED index2 }
then you should omit the second length value
(i.e. 4.'m'.'i'.'k'.'e'.'h'.'e'.'l'.'l'.'o')
But this *only* holds for the final index value.
All others will include the length subidentifier.
(That's not strictly true in the case of fixed-length strings,
but my guess is that this isn't relevant here)
OK?
Dave
--
Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
___
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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
On 15 April 2010 09:34, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Thanks for quick response and as you said lets assume the index looks like
{ index1, IMPLIED index2 }
and lets simplify the index from two to one
Which?
Are you asking about a two-string indexed table, or a single-string
indexed table?
and lets say this looks like
index c1 rowstatus
--
ab 1
hi 2
cd 3
ef 4
bc 5
In that case, the table **as reported via SNMP** should be walked in the order
c1.ab = 1
c1.bc = 5
c1.cd = 3
c1.ef = 4
c1.hi = 2
rowstatus.ab = ...
rowstatus.bc = ...
rowstatus.cd = ...
rowstatus.ef = ...
rowstatus.hi = ...
In the above scenario, the index is not according to lexicographical
(am i correct?) order and this is because its is not sorted(lets assume).
I presume this is how the data is represented internally?
(Either within the agent, or in the underlying subsystem).
In which case, one of the tasks of the MIB implementation module
is to present the data in lexicographical order, as above.
That's precisely the purpose of the 'iterator' helper.
So, how does the getnext works here?
How is the next lexicographically index found? Is this like this
ab then bc then cd then ef and hi
Correct.
Note that this works as expected because all the strings are
the same length. If some of the index strings were longer
than others, then the order depends on whether the table is
IMPLIED or not.
An IMPLIED index would continue to work in dictionary order.
A non-IMPLIED index would sort by length first. So short index
strings would come before longer ones.
OK?
Dave
Could you pl also answer ip address being index from my earlier post
Patience - I'll get onto that once I'm happy that you're confident with
the stuff above!
--
Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
___
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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
Dave,
Thanks.
Now that this should help me out on the double index issue..
1) If the table is like this and the none mentioned for second index(so
assuming non- implied...)
Index1 Index2 c1 RS
--
AB BEA 1
AB DC 2
BC QF 30
DE FC 15
DE AD 10
Then walk should be like
c1.ABDC
c1.ABBEA
c1.BCQF
c1.DEAD
c1.DEFC
And if second index is IMPLIED then the walk is :
c1.ABBEA
c1.ABDC
c1.BCQF
c1.DEAD
c1.DEFC
Am I right?
2)You mentioned 'iterator' helper. Is this generic library helper or any
specific one?
Can you provide some examples pl.?
3)If the example from my previous post is altered to
index c1 rowstatus
--
ab 1
ag 1 this is new addition
hi 2
cd 3
ef 4
bc 5
In that case, the table **as reported via SNMP** should be walked in the order
c1.ab = 1
c1.ag = 1 Here goes the new one ..as 'a' in ab and 'a' in ag are
same then next comparision is between b and g so g comes second as per
lexicographis order am I right?
c1.bc = 5
c1.cd = 3
c1.ef = 4
c1.hi = 2
rowstatus.ab = ...
rowstatus.bc = ...
rowstatus.cd = ...
rowstatus.ef = ...
rowstatus.hi = ...
And again if this is modified to
index c1 rowstatus
--
ab 1
abc 1 new one and single letter
ag 1
hi 2
cd 3
ef 4
bc 5
and assuming that the index is non-IMPLIED which one comes first in the walk
c1.ab or c1.ag ? as both got 2 letters ? May I assume this is going to be
implementation specific as some or other logic needs to be applied at the end
to retrieve the data for non-implied indexand 'abg' comes last in the walk
as this is three letter
Regards
--- On Thu, 15/4/10, Dave Shield d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk wrote:
From: Dave Shield d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Regarding string as index for tables
To: phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Thursday, 15 April, 2010, 9:50
On 15 April 2010 09:34, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Thanks for quick response and as you said lets assume the index looks like
{ index1, IMPLIED index2 }
and lets simplify the index from two to one
Which?
Are you asking about a two-string indexed table, or a single-string
indexed table?
and lets say this looks like
index c1 rowstatus
--
ab 1
hi 2
cd 3
ef 4
bc 5
In that case, the table **as reported via SNMP** should be walked in the order
c1.ab = 1
c1.bc = 5
c1.cd = 3
c1.ef = 4
c1.hi = 2
rowstatus.ab = ...
rowstatus.bc = ...
rowstatus.cd = ...
rowstatus.ef = ...
rowstatus.hi = ...
In the above scenario, the index is not according to lexicographical
(am i correct?) order and this is because its is not sorted(lets assume).
I presume this is how the data is represented internally?
(Either within the agent, or in the underlying subsystem).
In which case, one of the tasks of the MIB implementation module
is to present the data in lexicographical order, as above.
That's precisely the purpose of the 'iterator' helper.
So, how does the getnext works here?
How is the next lexicographically index found? Is this like this
ab then bc then cd then ef and hi
Correct.
Note that this works as expected because all the strings are
the same length. If some of the index strings were longer
than others, then the order depends on whether the table is
IMPLIED or not.
An IMPLIED index would continue to work in dictionary order.
A non-IMPLIED index would sort by length first. So short index
strings would come before longer ones.
OK?
Dave
Could you pl also answer ip address being index from my earlier post
Patience - I'll get onto that once I'm happy that you're confident with
the stuff above!
--
Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___
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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
On 15 April 2010 10:32, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Then walk should be like c1.ABDC c1.ABBEA c1.BCQF c1.DEAD c1.DEFC I'd suggest that you separate the index strings, to make the division clearer i.e. c1.AB.DC etc But that's just presentational. The order you list is correct. And if second index is IMPLIED then the walk is : c1.ABBEA c1.ABDC c1.BCQF c1.DEAD c1.DEFC Am I right? By George, I think he's got it! 2)You mentioned 'iterator' helper. Is this generic library helper or any specific one? Can you provide some examples pl.? It's one of the helpers from the 'libnetsnmpagent' library. There are several examples of MIB implementations that use this helper under 'agent/mibgroup'. It's also covered in the tutorials on the project website 3)If the example from my previous post is altered to [snip] In that case, the table **as reported via SNMP** should be walked in the order c1.ab = 1 c1.ag = 1 Here goes the new one ..as 'a' in ab and 'a' in ag are same then next comparision is between b and g so g comes second as per lexicographis order am I right? Yes c1.bc = 5 c1.cd = 3 c1.ef = 4 c1.hi = 2 rowstatus.ab = ... You should also see rowstatus.ag = here rowstatus.bc = ... rowstatus.cd = ... rowstatus.ef = ... rowstatus.hi = ... And again if this is modified to index c1 rowstatus -- ab 1 abc 1 new one and single letter ag 1 [snip] and assuming that the index is non-IMPLIED which one comes first in the walk c1.ab or c1.ag ? as both got 2 letters ? If the index is non-IMPLIED, then it's sorted by length first, then by lexicographic order. i.e. ab, ag, bc, cd, ef, hi, abc May I assume this is going to be implementation specific No! SNMP is very clear about the mapping from index values to the resulting OID - so that this is *NOT* implementation specific. The order of a table is defined precisely - regardless of the vendor(s) involved. That's what standards are all about! Try writing these index values down using numeric subidentifiers rather than characters i.e. 2.97.98 instead ofab 3.97.98.99 instead of abc 2.104.105 instead of hi etc, and compare the OIDs. That should make it clear why things come in the order that they do. Dave -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ 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
I can't see load balancing into FORWARDIB-MIB (ip.24) with Net-snmp
Hi The configuation is: I have zebra (routing daemon) running with OSPF (It has enable Equal Cost multi-path). With command ip route i can see load balancing (for example) between two interfaces. #ip route 11.0.6.0/24 proto zebra metric 30 nexthop via 11.0.15.2 dev eth0 weight 1 nexthop via 11.0.16.2 dev eth2 weight 1 11.0.22.0/24 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 11.0.22.1 11.0.23.0/24 via 11.0.16.2 dev eth2 proto zebra metric 20 11.0.7.0/24 via 11.0.16.2 dev eth2 proto zebra metric 20 11.0.20.0/24 proto zebra metric 20 nexthop via 11.0.19.2 dev eth1 weight 1 nexthop via 11.0.16.2 dev eth2 weight 1 ... But, when i consult forwarding-mib (ip.24) i can't see this load balancing, only can see one path. why? snmptable -v 2c -c public localhost -CH -Ci -Os -Cf ' ' ip.24.4 ... 11.0.4.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.4.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 20 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.5.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.5.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 30 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.6.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.6.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 30 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.7.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.16.2 11.0.7.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.16.2 5 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 20 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.8.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.8.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 30 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.9.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.9.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 40 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.10.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.10.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 40 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.11.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.11.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 30 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.12.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.12.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 30 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.13.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.13.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 40 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.14.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.15.2 11.0.14.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.15.2 3 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 20 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.15.0.0.255.255.255.0.0.0.0.0 11.0.15.0 0.255.255.255 0 0.0.0.0 3 local local ? zeroDotZero 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.16.0.0.255.255.255.0.0.0.0.0 11.0.16.0 0.255.255.255 0 0.0.0.0 5 local local ? zeroDotZero 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.18.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.16.2 11.0.18.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.16.2 5 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 20 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.19.0.0.255.255.255.0.0.0.0.0 11.0.19.0 0.255.255.255 0 0.0.0.0 4 local local ? zeroDotZero 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 active 11.0.20.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.19.2 11.0.20.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.19.2 4 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 20 -1 -1 -1 -1 active-- 11.0.21.0.0.255.255.255.0.11.0.19.2 11.0.21.0 0.255.255.255 0 11.0.19.2 4 remote local ? zeroDotZero 0 20 -1 -1 -1 -1 active ... thanks in advance. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___ 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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
Dave, Thanks a lot. Just to wind things for the day, this is the last one trust me. 1) So taking this logic to table with ip address as the index, lets say the following one: index c1 1.2.3.4 10 10.3.4.5 20 1.3.4.5 30 1.2.4.4 40 then the walk should yield : c1.1.2.3.4 c1.1.2.4.4 c1.1.3.4.5 c1.10.3.4.5 If I am correct , in the case of c1.1.2.3.4 and c1.1.2.4.4 as both the first two octets are same the next lexicographical one to that is 3. So all this is comparing octets and finding out which is next/greater to the current one ? 2) This is about ip address representation in the MIB. I remember we got IpAddress TC from SMIv2 and we can use it. But then there is some new discussion came across saying, the IpAddress TC is old and there is new one and more precise which people are using now-a-days !! I am not sure this i a new TC or donno This is what I heard !! Dave, your comments please... Regards --- On Thu, 15/4/10, Dave Shield d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk wrote: From: Dave Shield d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk Subject: Re: Regarding string as index for tables To: phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Thursday, 15 April, 2010, 10:52 On 15 April 2010 10:32, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Then walk should be like c1.ABDC c1.ABBEA c1.BCQF c1.DEAD c1.DEFC I'd suggest that you separate the index strings, to make the division clearer i.e. c1.AB.DC etc But that's just presentational. The order you list is correct. And if second index is IMPLIED then the walk is : c1.ABBEA c1.ABDC c1.BCQF c1.DEAD c1.DEFC Am I right? By George, I think he's got it! 2)You mentioned 'iterator' helper. Is this generic library helper or any specific one? Can you provide some examples pl.? It's one of the helpers from the 'libnetsnmpagent' library. There are several examples of MIB implementations that use this helper under 'agent/mibgroup'. It's also covered in the tutorials on the project website 3)If the example from my previous post is altered to [snip] In that case, the table **as reported via SNMP** should be walked in the order c1.ab = 1 c1.ag = 1 Here goes the new one ..as 'a' in ab and 'a' in ag are same then next comparision is between b and g so g comes second as per lexicographis order am I right? Yes c1.bc = 5 c1.cd = 3 c1.ef = 4 c1.hi = 2 rowstatus.ab = ... You should also see rowstatus.ag = here rowstatus.bc = ... rowstatus.cd = ... rowstatus.ef = ... rowstatus.hi = ... And again if this is modified to index c1 rowstatus -- ab 1 abc 1 new one and single letter ag 1 [snip] and assuming that the index is non-IMPLIED which one comes first in the walk c1.ab or c1.ag ? as both got 2 letters ? If the index is non-IMPLIED, then it's sorted by length first, then by lexicographic order. i.e. ab, ag, bc, cd, ef, hi, abc May I assume this is going to be implementation specific No! SNMP is very clear about the mapping from index values to the resulting OID - so that this is *NOT* implementation specific. The order of a table is defined precisely - regardless of the vendor(s) involved. That's what standards are all about! Try writing these index values down using numeric subidentifiers rather than characters i.e. 2.97.98 instead of ab 3.97.98.99 instead of abc 2.104.105 instead of hi etc, and compare the OIDs. That should make it clear why things come in the order that they do. Dave -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___ 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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
On 15 April 2010 11:14, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Just to wind things for the day, this is the last one trust me. 1) So taking this logic to table with ip address as the index then the walk should yield : c1.1.2.3.4 c1.1.2.4.4 c1.1.3.4.5 c1.10.3.4.5 Exactly. The reason that I've been hanging off discussing IP addresses is that these are defined as fixed-size, so are automatically handled as IMPLIED strings and hence do not include the size subidentifier. This happens automatically - you don't need to define the index object as IMPLIED for a fixed-length string. It's implied IMPLIED (even when it's not the last index object - which you can't do with the explicit IMPLIED token) If I am correct , in the case of c1.1.2.3.4 and c1.1.2.4.4 as both the first two octets are same the next lexicographical one to that is 3. So all this is comparing octets and finding out which is next/greater to the current one ? Zigactly! 2) This is about ip address representation in the MIB. I remember we got IpAddress TC from SMIv2 and we can use it. But then there is some new discussion came across saying, the IpAddress TC is old and there is new one and more precise which people are using now-a-days !! The issue with the IpAddress TC is that it is explicitly designed for IPv4. It cannot handle IPv6 addresses. It's therefore being deprecated in favour of an (InetAddressType,InetAddress) pair, which can handle both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses (plus other types as well). But note that InetAddressType is *not* fixed-length, so isn't automatically treated as IMPLIED. I am not sure this i a new TC or donno These are defined in INET-ADDRESS-MIB. For examples of their use, see (e.g.) UDP-MIB or TCP-MIB. Try comparing the tables defined here, with the equivalent ones in RFC1213. Dave -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ 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
Re: Regarding string as index for tables
Thanks Dave. Really appreciate your help spending time on my issues. Best Regards, --- On Thu, 15/4/10, Dave Shield d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk wrote: From: Dave Shield d.t.shi...@liverpool.ac.uk Subject: Re: Regarding string as index for tables To: phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Thursday, 15 April, 2010, 11:28 On 15 April 2010 11:14, phani kumar kumarc...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Just to wind things for the day, this is the last one trust me. 1) So taking this logic to table with ip address as the index then the walk should yield : c1.1.2.3.4 c1.1.2.4.4 c1.1.3.4.5 c1.10.3.4.5 Exactly. The reason that I've been hanging off discussing IP addresses is that these are defined as fixed-size, so are automatically handled as IMPLIED strings and hence do not include the size subidentifier. This happens automatically - you don't need to define the index object as IMPLIED for a fixed-length string. It's implied IMPLIED (even when it's not the last index object - which you can't do with the explicit IMPLIED token) If I am correct , in the case of c1.1.2.3.4 and c1.1.2.4.4 as both the first two octets are same the next lexicographical one to that is 3. So all this is comparing octets and finding out which is next/greater to the current one ? Zigactly! 2) This is about ip address representation in the MIB. I remember we got IpAddress TC from SMIv2 and we can use it. But then there is some new discussion came across saying, the IpAddress TC is old and there is new one and more precise which people are using now-a-days !! The issue with the IpAddress TC is that it is explicitly designed for IPv4. It cannot handle IPv6 addresses. It's therefore being deprecated in favour of an (InetAddressType,InetAddress) pair, which can handle both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses (plus other types as well). But note that InetAddressType is *not* fixed-length, so isn't automatically treated as IMPLIED. I am not sure this i a new TC or donno These are defined in INET-ADDRESS-MIB. For examples of their use, see (e.g.) UDP-MIB or TCP-MIB. Try comparing the tables defined here, with the equivalent ones in RFC1213. Dave -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___ 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
RE: SNMP4J-agentX
From: Piljoo Choi [mailto:cpil...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 10:32 PM Sorry for asking about SNMP4J -agentX library. But, there could be someone in the group knows well and has some experience with SNMP4J- agentX subagent. Has anyone wrote a subagentX in Java with SNMP4J agentX API? I need to write a subagentX that will be connecting to my master agent and handles incoming requests(GET/SET,,etc). If someone had experience with it, please advise me how to set up those API in my subagent class. I couldn't find any document on how to use its APIs...even in SNMP4J website. I posted this question but I haven't heard anything... I don't know about SNMP4J-AgentX, but if you're not required to use it, you may want to look at J-AgentX (http://eden.dei.uc.pt/agentx/), which seems to have decent tutoials. HTH, Mike -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ 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
