> "DS" == Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> That problem with internal queries over a delegated session is an
DS> important one, I'd agree. That's what we should be concentrating
DS> on, IMO - not duplicating existing functionality.
Dave,
I think that's a bit harsh of a view. It
Subject
AM
On 24/05/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The reason for my implementing RMON is that my customers want it,
> not that to reproduce the DISMAN-EVENT-MIB problem.
Fair enough.
That makes more sense.
> If you agreed it's an important one to fix internal queries over a
> delegate
05/23/2007 11:01 cc
PM[EMAIL PROTECTED]
et
Subject
OTECTED]>
email.com cc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
et
05/24/2007 03:18 Subject
AM
On 22/05/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>However, DISMAN-EVENT-MIB has the problem in
> monitoring delegated objects(reported in net-snmp-Bugs-1689163), hence it
> is not completely usable either.
>
> Here I implemented new alarmTable.
>. I
Hello!
Thanks for your contribution, it is always nice to see it.
A few random comments:
1. I think the header file should be stripped down to the bare minimum:
---
#ifndef ALARMTABLE_H
#define ALARMTABLE_H
voidinit_alarmTable(void);
#endif
---
but that is a style issue an
et
Subject
Re: New Rmon alarmTable
> "EY" == Emi Yanagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
EY> I would like to contribute my alarmTable code to net-snmp-coders,
EY> in hoping to receive some helps from Net-SNMP experts to resolve
EY> the internal query for delegated objects problem, also reported in
EY> net-snmp-Bugs-1689163.
Thanks
