Hi Don,
This is obviously a bug and will be fixed with the next SNMP4J-Agent release.
Best regards,
Frank
> On 9. Aug 2017, at 16:54, Broderick, Don <d...@mitre.org> wrote:
>
> SNMP4J version 2.5.6
> SNMP4J-Agent version 2.6.0
>
> I have discovered the following behavior inconsistency where I would expect
> no error to be returned in both cases.
>
> When a PDU is sent containing one SET of a row status to 6 for destroy for a
> row that exists the row is destroyed and no error is returned. Performing
> the same operation in a separate PDU for a row that does not exist again
> returns no error. When a PDU containing 2 SETs, one for a row that exists
> and one for a row that does not exist (both in the same table) a commit
> failed error is returned and the row that existed is destroyed.
>
> In the line highlighted below of DefaultMOTable the variable "row" has a null
> value when this event occurs and causes a null pointer exception.
>
> public void commit(SubRequest request) {
> OID cellOID = request.getVariableBinding().getOid();
> MOTableCellInfo cell = getCellInfo(cellOID);
> MOMutableColumn col = (MOMutableColumn) getColumn(cell.getColumn());
> if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
> logger.debug("Committing sub-request ("+
> request.getVariableBinding()+") for column: "+col);
> }
> // Make sure changes are atomic -> sync whole table model
> synchronized (model) {
> R row;
> if (hasNewRows(request.getRequest())) {
> row = getNewRows(request.getRequest()).get(cell.getIndex());
> // check if row has been added already
> if (!model.containsRow(row.getIndex())) {
> if (!addRow(row)) {
> request.setErrorStatus(PDU.resourceUnavailable);
> return;
> }
> }
> }
> else {
> row = model.getRow(cell.getIndex());
> }
>
> -DonB
> _______________________________________________
> SNMP4J mailing list
> SNMP4J@agentpp.org
> https://oosnmp.net/mailman/listinfo/snmp4j
_______________________________________________
SNMP4J mailing list
SNMP4J@agentpp.org
https://oosnmp.net/mailman/listinfo/snmp4j
