[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference turris::digital_unix

Title:DIGITAL UNIX(FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEC OSF/1)
Notice:Welcome to the Digital UNIX Conference
Moderator:SMURF::DENHAM
Created:Thu Mar 16 1995
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:10068
Total number of notes:35879

9855.0. "SNMP - anything missing?" by NNTPD::"[email protected]" () Fri May 16 1997 13:24

Folks

I need to understand all the standards our implementation of SNMP on 
Digital UNIX supports i.e. MIB-V2 in detail for a customer requirment.
More importantly, I need to know if there are any shortcomings we may
have not put in based on V4.0b...i.e. are we definitively 100%?

Secondly, is there a list of all the traps we support available?  I 
haven't seen it yet in the documentation, but I'll continue to search
around this afternoon.

Thanks in Advance
Steve
[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
9855.1SMURF::DANIELEFri May 16 1997 15:1671
>I need to understand all the standards our implementation of SNMP on 
>Digital UNIX supports i.e. MIB-V2 in detail for a customer requirment.
>More importantly, I need to know if there are any shortcomings we may
>have not put in based on V4.0b...i.e. are we definitively 100%?

To start with, read note 9854.

The SPD lists any limitations/conditions on any Internet Standard
MIBs we implement (the RFCs listed in the SPD, and in note 9854).
So your official answer must come from there.

Off the top of my head, I believe in 4.0b we are 100% compliant 
w/ mib-2.  We don't permit writes in the other MIBs.  And we
don't implement the installed software group of Host MIB.

>Secondly, is there a list of all the traps we support available?  I 
>haven't seen it yet in the documentation, but I'll continue to search
>around this afternoon.

Traps are part of a MIB specification.  Of the 4 RFCs referred to above,
only mib-2 RFC1213 (well, really RFC1157 SNMPv1) defines any traps.  
Of those, we support (text taken from RFC1157):

4.1.6.1.  The coldStart Trap

   A coldStart(0) trap signifies that the sending protocol entity is
   reinitializing itself such that the agent's configuration or the
   protocol entity implementation may be altered.

4.1.6.3.  The linkDown Trap

   A linkDown(2) trap signifies that the sending protocol entity
   recognizes a failure in one of the communication links represented in
   the agent's configuration.

   The Trap-PDU of type linkDown contains as the first element of its
   variable-bindings, the name and value of the ifIndex instance for the
   affected interface.

4.1.6.4.  The linkUp Trap

   A linkUp(3) trap signifies that the sending protocol entity
   recognizes that one of the communication links represented in the
   agent's configuration has come up.

   The Trap-PDU of type linkUp contains as the first element of its
   variable-bindings, the name and value of the ifIndex instance for the
   affected interface.

4.1.6.5.  The authenticationFailure Trap

   An authenticationFailure(4) trap signifies that the sending protocol
   entity is the addressee of a protocol message that is not properly
   authenticated.  While implementations of the SNMP must be capable of
   generating this trap, they must also be capable of suppressing the
   emission of such traps via an implementation-specific mechanism.

4.1.6.7.  The enterpriseSpecific Trap

   A enterpriseSpecific(6) trap signifies that the sending protocol
   entity recognizes that some enterprise-specific event has occurred.
   The specific-trap field identifies the particular trap which
   occurred.

The last one is supported at the extensible agent's API, and would only
be generated if some enterprise specific MIB code (subagent) is configured 
and raises the trap.

Hope this helps.

Mike