nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

RV: [nv-l] Snmpwalk failure

To: "Nv-L (E-mail)" <nv-l@lists.tivoli.com>
Subject: RV: [nv-l] Snmpwalk failure
From: "Federico Vidal" <fvidal@tecsystem.com.ar>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 10:28:22 -0300
Delivered-to: mailing list nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Delivery-date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:25:11 +0100
Envelope-to: nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk
List-help: <mailto:nv-l-help@lists.tivoli.com>
List-post: <mailto:nv-l@lists.tivoli.com>
List-subscribe: <mailto:nv-l-subscribe@lists.tivoli.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:nv-l-unsubscribe@lists.tivoli.com>
Mailing-list: contact nv-l-help@lists.tivoli.com; run by ezmlm
Thread-index: AcNS30xFQJ8mpOMASBuG5APpzg2zmQCKvlzQAAByW1A=
Thread-topic: [nv-l] Snmpwalk failure
Fawad:
 
    It appears to be that the firewall is blocking port 161 UDP from server 1 to the router.... Have you checked on that?
Anyway, you must be certain that the fw lets port 161 to go and to come fbetween the server 1 and the router. It is recommened that you also let port UDP 162 (traps) pass from the router to server 1.
    You say that nmdemandpoll succeeds, and that is not false because it could ping the router.... but it couldn't reach it by SNMP (watch nmdemandpoll output closely and it should say SNMP timed out or something like that"). The proof is that it didn't recognize it as a Cisco Router, as the server 2 did. The ovobjprint you show says that. Server2 does not have any problem due to being on the same subnet.
    I'm pretty sure that is a Firewall issue, the proof is that (when using the correct community) snmpwalk/snmpget does not respond. At least you know the ports to tell to the fw people....(161,162)...
 
Regards,
 
Federico Vidal
IBM Certified Deployment Professional
Tecsystem S.R.L.
e-mail: fvidal@tecsystem.com.ar
Tel: (5411)-4814-2770 ext. 120
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Qureshi, Fawad [mailto:Fawad.Qureshi@ssa.gov]
Enviado el: Viernes, 25 de Julio de 2003 03:56 p.m.
Para: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Asunto: [nv-l] Snmpwalk failure
Importancia: Alta

Netview 7.1.3 on AIX 4.3.3

Nmdemandpoll and ping are successful from the Netview server (server1) to a router, but snmpwalk fails. Router is behind a firewall. All snmp parameters are set correctly on the router, including the access list. Another Netview server (server2) sitting on the same subnet as the router is able to snmpwalk the router fine.

Ovobjprint on the router from server1 shows (among other things):

    14 OVW Maps Exists 1
    15 OVW Maps Managed 1
    57 SNMPAgent Unset(0)
    82 IP Status Normal(2)
    85 isIPRouter FALSE
    112 vendor Unset(0)
    124 isNode TRUE
    126 isComputer TRUE
    127 isConnector FALSE
    128 isBridge FALSE
    129 isRouter FALSE

[notice the SNMP Agent Unset(0) and isRouter FALSE fields]

Ovobjprint on the router from server2 shows (among other things):

    14 OVW Maps Exists 1
    15 OVW Maps Managed 1
    57 SNMPAgent Cisco Router(3)
    82 IP Status Normal(2)
    85 isIPRouter TRUE
    112 vendor cisco Systems(12)
    124 isNode TRUE
    126 isComputer TRUE
    127 isConnector TRUE
    128 isBridge FALSE
    129 isRouter TRUE

Before I go jumping on the firewall people, is there something I can try to ensure it is a firewall issue?

Cheers,

Fawad Qureshi
RSIS - DNE
410-965-4413

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • RV: [nv-l] Snmpwalk failure, Federico Vidal <=

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web