Re: [lwip-users] Help with SNMP Table Columns vs Rows and extra node

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Trampas,

I'm also trying to understand when should I follow the requirements or 
implemented it in SNMP way.

> I am also going to have enable SNMP v3, so if you get there first let me know.

I tested the SNMPv3 example and it worked for me.
I had some issue and then I disable the SNMPv3 but couldn't remember what it 
was.

Seems you have a lot more work than me with thousands of parameters :)

Mario

________________________________________
From: lwip-users <lwip-users-bounces+mrluzeiro=address@hidden> on behalf of 
Trampas Stern <address@hidden>
Sent: 06 November 2019 20:15
To: Mailing list for lwIP users
Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Help with SNMP Table Columns vs Rows and extra node

I am in the same exact boat...

I though the node would be one less from the code, and the columns and rows 
were swapped.  However I figured that the columns and rows are just a 
nomenclature thing and I really do not care when you do the snmpwalk which way 
they show up.

For my application I will have around 3400 SNMP parameters, so far I have 
gotten 2800 working.  92 sensors with 29 parameters each is the bulk of them.

I am also going to have enable SNMP v3, so if you get there first let me know.



Trampas

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 10:25 AM Mário Luzeiro 
<address@hidden<mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
Hello all,

I was testing the SNMP private example: 
lwip/contrib/examples/snmp/snmp_private_mib/
and I got this
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1.1 = INTEGER: 11
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1.2 = INTEGER: 22
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1.3 = INTEGER: 33
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1.4 = INTEGER: 44
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.2.1 = STRING: "0.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.2.2 = STRING: "1.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.2.3 = STRING: "2.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.2.4 = STRING: "3.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.2.0 = INTEGER:

I noticed that the source code the TABLE is created with Columns
however, it looks that from my specification (the private MIB I must implement) 
it is defined as Rows.
Would it be possible ?

so I will get something instead:

iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1 = INTEGER: 11
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.2 = STRING: "0.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.2.1 = INTEGER: 22
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.2.2 = STRING: "1.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.3.1 = INTEGER: 33
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.3.2 = STRING: "2.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.4.1 = INTEGER: 44
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.4.2 = STRING: "3.txt"
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.2.0 = INTEGER:


Another question, it looks Table is creating a new node in between:
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1.1 = INTEGER: 11
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.2.0 = INTEGER:

and I was expecting it with less one node in the hierarchy:
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.1.1.1 = INTEGER: 11
iso.3.6.1.4.1.26381.1.2.0 = INTEGER:


I am also completely new to SNMP so I have no idea if it should be columns or 
rows or what about this extra node if it is expected.

Anyone could clarify me ?

Mario Luzeiro
_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
address@hidden<mailto:address@hidden>
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users