North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: public accessible snmp devices?
- From: Alexei Roudnev
- Date: Mon Mar 07 03:04:46 2005
It's OK to see any garbage in SNMP; I never got surprised (as I was not
surprised when I killed firewall by snmpwalk).
No one (in reality) makes good QA on SNMP functions (on routers or
I already have a few sanity checks in 'snmpstat', may be I should add one
more (ignore answers with 0 counters).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Petri Helenius" <email@example.com>
To: "Jim Popovitch" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: "Alexei Roudnev" <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: public accessible snmp devices?
> Jim Popovitch wrote:
> >I think this could be relevant. a LOT of devices drop snmp requests
> >when they get busy or when too many incoming requests occur. Are you
> >sure that you were the only one polling that device? Perhaps someone
> >else put it into a "busy" state. Too often with SNMP devices and tools
> >a '0' can mean things other than zero.
> So you are saying that it's ok for a Cisco or Juniper router to return
> zero for a counter when they feel "busy" ?
> My RFC collection tells a different story.