RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-03-01 Thread Harold J. Ship
Ok - I got it to work. In 5.2.1, I had removed the init_snmp() call because we handle our own config file. By adding this back in, as init_snmp("") it works. I had noticed that a GET to the right community returned error, but the wrong community didn't return anything at all, so I investigated the

RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-03-01 Thread Dave Shield
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 15:08 +0200, Harold J. Ship wrote: > I'm trying to compile, link and run in 5.3.0.1 the code generated and > modified in 5.2.1 and I'm finding that nothing is happening: > Before I get too caught up in this, is this legal? The code was > generated in 5.2.1 using MFD; plus the

RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-03-01 Thread Harold J. Ship
I'm trying to compile, link and run in 5.3.0.1 the code generated and modified in 5.2.1 and I'm finding that nothing is happening: I receive "No more variables left in this MIB View" for any GET or GETNEXT. Before I get too caught up in this, is this legal? The code was generated in 5.2.1 using MF

Re: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-02-06 Thread Wes Hardaker
> On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 14:56:05 +0200, "Harold J. Ship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > said: Harold> I've just tried a small example using 5.3.0.1 and GET-BULK with MFD Harold> appears to be ok. Harold> In order to port our agent over, it will take a few days of Harold> effort. We may or may not de

RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-02-05 Thread Harold J. Ship
I've just tried a small example using 5.3.0.1 and GET-BULK with MFD appears to be ok. In order to port our agent over, it will take a few days of effort. We may or may not depending upon a number of factors. Harold Ship Giant Steps Networks --

RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-01-31 Thread Dave Shield
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 14:39 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Will this problem affect other MIB2C template implementations > like mib2c.iterate.conf? It shouldn't do, no. I believe that the fixes Robert is referring to are specifically concerned with MfD code. They shouldn't affect the iterator

RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-01-30 Thread sasson_shuki
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Story Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 11:03 AM To: Harold J. Ship Cc: net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: GETBULK and MFD Tables On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:03:28 +0200 Harold wrote: HJS> You are right, we are using 5.2.1. I'd

Re: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-01-26 Thread Robert Story
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:03:28 +0200 Harold wrote: HJS> You are right, we are using 5.2.1. I'd like to avoid having to convert HJS> all of our agent to 5.3 if I can. Ok. What about 5.2.2? That's a smaller step (though I'm not 100% sure it will fix the problem). HJS> I tried the change you suggested

RE: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-01-22 Thread Harold J. Ship
You are right, we are using 5.2.1. I'd like to avoid having to convert all of our agent to 5.3 if I can. I tried the change you suggested, changing ASN_PRIV_RETRY to SNMP_NOSUCHINSTANCE in the _mfd_xTable_get_values() function both in the current table and the following table, but that didn't help

Re: GETBULK and MFD Tables

2006-01-22 Thread Robert Story
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:32:33 +0200 Harold wrote: HJS> I have a problem with GETBULK on an agent developed using mib2c with HJS> MFD. You didn't say which release, but I'm guessing 5.2.x, right? If you can, jump up to 5.3.0.1. There have been lots of improvements to the generated code in 5.3. If yo