Joe,
Thanks for the pointer. I've grep'd the RFCs in
/usr/OV/doc and the MIBs in /usr/OV/snmp_mibs, but I
can't seem to locate the comment that you've identified.
Can you please point me to the location/name of the doc?
Sun has categorized the volatile SNMPsets as a Request
for Enhancement (RFE). The program may not be rhobust
or polite, but they say that it's functioning as
designed... The only workaround they identified is to
directly edit the conf file. If you're interested in
tracking this, the Sun ID# is 4314553.
Thanks again,
-elizabeth
Tivoli Education
In a message dated Mon, 6 Mar 2000 4:36:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, Joe
Fernandez <jfernand@kardinia.com> writes:
> Elizabeth,
> I don't know if this answer is too late to be of use to you, but I have not
> seen any other answers.
> I happened to be reading the drafts of the SNMP Distributed Management MIBs
> and I noticed they say the following:
>
> "Although like most MIBs this one has no explicit controls for the
> persistence of the values set in configuring (...) , a robust, polite
> implementation would certainly not force its managing applications to
> reconfigure it whenever it resets."
>
> So tell them that the draft standards say their implementation is not
> polite (or robust).
>
> At 03:14 PM 11-02-00 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hello --
> >
> >This question delves into specific SNMP info, rather than NetView info.
> But, it's directly tied to last week's thread on snmpdx problems and it
> sounds as though many of us have run across the problem.
> >
> >You may recall that we had a problem with SNMPsets of MIB-2 variables not
> persisting across restarts of the SNMP agents under SEA 1.0.3 on Sol 7. I
> forwarded the information collected from everyone who experienced and did
> troubleshooting for this problem to Sun L2 support in Service Order
> #4377907. L3 support eventually reproduced the problem and turned it over
> to the Sun engineers who have labeled this as an RFE (Request for
> Enhancement), rather than a bug. This seems strange.
> >
> >Does anyone know of a specific fact -- statement in an RFC perhaps -- that
> indicates that SNMPsets are supposed to be persistent? L3 is escalating
> this, but needs supporting documentation that this is a bug and not an RFE.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >elizabeth
> >Tivoli Education
>
> Joe Fernandez
> Kardinia Software
> jfernand@kardinia.com
>
> http://www.kardinia.com
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
>
> NV-L List information (unsubscribing, policies, posting, digest version,
> searchable archives): http://www.tkg.com/nv-l
|