[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       net-snmp-users
Subject:    RE: trap format
From:       WEISZ Joel <JWeisz () toronto ! sema ! slb ! com>
Date:       2002-07-31 15:34:09
[Download RAW message or body]

Oopss.. seems i was wrong.  AGENTX_MSG_NOTIFY indicates that this is an
agentx pdu.  The correct form of an agentx PDU would be the trap oid
followed by the time stamp as was found in the code.  My question then is,
should the object id contained in the SNMP PDU sent by the master agent be
that of the subagent enterprise trap or of the master agent?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: WEISZ Joel [mailto:JWeisz@toronto.sema.slb.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:36 AM
> To: 'net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net'
> Subject: RE: trap format 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking through the code, I can see that, having created the PDU using
> snmp_pdu_create(AGENTX_MSG_NOTIFY), the oid is being added using the
> snmp_pdu_add_variable api adding it as type ASN_OBJECT_ID 
> followed by the
> time_stamp, the EventSno...and numerous other variables.  It 
> appears to me,
> from what I can find, that the time_stamp should in fact come 
> first and be
> bound to .1.2.6.1.2.1.1.3 and that the enterprise trap oid bound to
> .1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1 should immediately follow.  Am I way off 
> base here?  I
> believe this is the format for v2c.
> 
> 
> 
> >> The "received event", as displayed by HP OpenView is identified as
> >> .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.250.3.0.5 and the ObjectIdentifer as NULL (not
> literally).
> > The trap is being generated by a subagent and sent via UCD 
> (using agentx).
> > 
> > Is this "normal" for a PDU generated by a subagent?
> 
> No - this is not normal.
> If nothing else, the OID is wrong.
> 
> How are you generating the trap?
> What's the code in the subagent that does this?
> 
> > My understanding that snmptrapoid.0  identifies that a 
> conversion between
> v1
> > and v2c has taken place... could this be the source of problems?
> 
> It's one potential source of problems, yes - particularly for the
> UCD traps (since they weren't defined suitably to cope with this
> conversion cleanly).
>   But of more concern to me is the OID branch that these traps are
> located in.  This looks completely bogus, IMO.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
> for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
> http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31
_______________________________________________
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
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]