From owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Fri Feb 4 06:11:59 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA21767 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 06:11:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id FAA09316; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 05:11:05 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id DAA23066 for agentx-list; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 03:01:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id DAA23061 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 03:01:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id FAA08054 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 05:01:55 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <20000204110152.598.qmail@web3105.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [136.182.2.222] by web3105.mail.yahoo.com; Fri, 04 Feb 2000 03:01:52 PST Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 03:01:52 -0800 (PST) From: gopal krishna Subject: Agentx Help To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list hi, 1) is this list Restricted to only for posting questions regarding RFC changes to AgentX protocol or could we post any questions regarding understanding the Agentx protocol and it's implementation. 2)is there any newsgroups for discussion on agentx, like what we have for snmp(comp.protocols.snmp). I came across a agentx list on egroups.com,but there seems to be no messages posted so far. regards, Gopal __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com From owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Fri Feb 4 09:04:03 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-1.bmc.com [198.207.223.250]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26869 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 09:04:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA04802; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 07:56:34 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id FAA23334 for agentx-list; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 05:21:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id FAA23329 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 05:21:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id HAA27938 for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 07:21:29 -0600 (CST) Received: from bnatale (ppp9.acec.com [38.249.211.62]) by relay1.acec.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA28571; Fri, 4 Feb 2000 08:20:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000204082043.00ab8080@plymouth.acec.com> X-Sender: bnatale@plymouth.acec.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 08:25:19 -0500 To: gopal krishna From: Bob Natale Subject: Re: Agentx Help Cc: agentx@dorothy.peer.com In-Reply-To: <20000204110152.598.qmail@web3105.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list At 2/4/2000:06:01 AM, gopal krishna wrote: Hi Gopal, >1) is this list Restricted to only for posting >questions regarding RFC changes to AgentX protocol or >could we post any questions regarding understanding >the Agentx protocol and it's implementation. Any matters concerning AgentX. Discussions leading to greater shared understanding and -- most certainly -- implementation and/or interoperability reports are most welcome at this time. (Just be sure you're working from RFCs 3741 and 2742!) > 2)is there any newsgroups for discussion on agentx, > like what we have for snmp(comp.protocols.snmp). > I came across a agentx list on egroups.com,but > there seems to be no messages posted so far. I do not follow usenet newsgroups much myself, so I cannot give an authoritative answer to that. However, AgentX is often discussed on the ucd-snmp-coders list and, less frequently, on the WinSNMP list. If you need/want to subscribe to those lists and need help in doing so, let me know. Cordially, BobN ------------ ISO 9001 Registered Quality Supplier ----------- Bob Natale | ACE*COMM | 301-721-3000 [v] Dir, Net Mgmt Prod | 704 Quince Orchard Rd | 301-721-3001 [f] bnatale@acecomm.com| Gaithersburg MD 20878 | www.acecomm.com ------------- Free downloads at www.winsnmp.com ------------- From owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Sat Feb 5 04:15:48 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA02735 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 04:15:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id DAA24663; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 03:15:14 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id BAA27987 for agentx-list; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 01:10:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id BAA27982 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 01:10:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id DAA24373 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 03:11:01 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 592 invoked by uid 60001); 5 Feb 2000 09:10:49 -0000 Message-ID: <20000205091049.591.qmail@web1904.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [136.182.2.221] by web1904.mail.yahoo.com; Sat, 05 Feb 2000 01:10:49 PST Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 01:10:49 -0800 (PST) From: Manohar Nelagadde Subject: Re: FW: Non-member submission from [Jian.Song@nokia.com] To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list Hi, Nobody has replied to this question.is that an error or intentional?. Regards, gopal --- "Appelbaum, Muriel" wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com > [mailto:owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com] > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 12:55 PM > To: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com > Subject: BOUNCE agentx@dorothy.bmc.com: Non-member > submission from > [Jian.Song@nokia.com] > > > From owner-agentx Mon Jan 31 12:54:38 2000 > Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com > [172.17.7.166]) > by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with > ESMTP id MAA07311 > for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 > 12:54:37 -0800 (PST) > From: Jian.Song@nokia.com > Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com > (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) > by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with > SMTP id OAA04098 > for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 > 14:54:43 -0600 (CST) > Received: from mgw-i2.ntc.nokia.com > (mgw-i2.ntc.nokia.com [131.228.118.61]) > by mgw-x2.nokia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/o) with ESMTP id > WAA25199 > for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 > 22:54:30 +0200 (EET) > Received: from daebh02nok.americas.nokia.com > (daebh02nok.americas.nokia.com > [172.18.242.183]) > by mgw-i2.ntc.nokia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id > WAA20115 > for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 > 22:54:29 +0200 (EET) > Received: by daebh02nok with Internet Mail Service > (5.5.2448.0) > id <1B3WD15L>; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 14:54:27 -0600 > Message-ID: > > To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com > Subject: agentxConnIndex missing > Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 14:53:49 -0600 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi, > > In RFC2742, agentxSessionTable is indexed by > {agentxConnIndex, > agentxSessionIndex}. However, agentxConnIndex is > missing from > > AgentxSessionEntry ::= SEQUENCE { > agentxSessionIndex Unsigned32, > agentxSessionObjectID OBJECT IDENTIFIER, > agentxSessionDescr SnmpAdminString, > agentxSessionAdminStatus INTEGER, > agentxSessionOpenTime TimeStamp, > agentxSessionAgentXVer INTEGER, > agentxSessionTimeout INTEGER > } > > I would appreciate that you let me know whether this > is an error or it is > intentional. > > Regards, > > Jian Song > Software Designer > Nokia > 555 Legget Dr. > Kanata, Ontario, Canada > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com From owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Sat Feb 5 07:54:01 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA03832 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 07:54:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id GAA08626; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 06:53:43 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id EAA28357 for agentx-list; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 04:46:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id EAA28352 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 04:46:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id GAA08098 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 06:46:52 -0600 (CST) Received: from henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (schoenw@henkell [134.169.34.191]) by mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA26817; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 13:47:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from schoenw@localhost by henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.7.6/tubsibr) id NAA09202; Sat, 5 Feb 2000 13:46:49 +0100 Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 13:46:49 +0100 Message-Id: <200002051246.NAA09202@henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: nelagadde@yahoo.com CC: agentx@dorothy.peer.com In-reply-to: <20000205091049.591.qmail@web1904.mail.yahoo.com> (message from Manohar Nelagadde on Sat, 5 Feb 2000 01:10:49 -0800 (PST)) Subject: Re: FW: Non-member submission from [Jian.Song@nokia.com] References: <20000205091049.591.qmail@web1904.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list >>>>> Manohar Nelagadde writes: Manohar> Hi, Nobody has replied to this question.is that an error or Manohar> intentional?. >> In RFC2742, agentxSessionTable is indexed by {agentxConnIndex, >> agentxSessionIndex}. However, agentxConnIndex is missing from >> AgentxSessionEntry. [...] >> I would appreciate that you let me know whether this is an error or >> it is intentional. The INDEX of the agentxSessionTable uses agentxConnIndex from the agentxConnectionEntry since the agentxSessionTable expands agentxConnectionTable. (A session is always bound to a connection). Everything is just fine. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Technical University Braunschweig Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks Phone: +49 531 391 3289 Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany Fax: +49 531 391 5936 From owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Mon Feb 7 04:46:01 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA01378 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 04:46:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id DAA15242; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 03:45:18 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id BAA10213 for agentx-list; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 01:35:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id BAA10208 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 01:35:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id DAA13749 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 03:36:12 -0600 (CST) Received: from ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.124.242]) by mailhub2.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12HkaS-0001SC-00 for agentx@dorothy.peer.com; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 09:36:04 +0000 Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (root@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk [138.253.124.36]) by ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.8/LUCS-DTS-3.0M10) with ESMTP id JAA19890 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 09:36:04 GMT Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (daves@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.7/LUCS-DTS-3.0D9) with ESMTP id JAA10785 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 09:38:37 GMT Message-Id: <200002070938.JAA10785@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com Subject: UCD AgentX implementation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed ; boundary="==_Exmh_-11142415040" Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 09:38:32 +0000 From: Dave Shield Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.peer.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list This is a multipart MIME message. --==_Exmh_-11142415040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii This is to announce that the UCD team have just released the latest distribution of our SNMP suite. The agent includes a mostly-complete implementation of AgentX. (That's complete enough for Wes to use it in a production system - personally I think he's nuts!) There are a number of known areas that have not been implemented fully (or at all), but there is sufficient functionality that it would be useful to gather some experience regarding interoperation with other AgentX implementations (hence this message). I'll append the README.AgentX file that lays out most of the known limitations. Note that almost all the development has taken place in a pure-UCD environment, and essentially on a single architecture. It is probable that various assumptions have been made that will not hold in the wider world. But that's why I'm asking for interoperability tests! If anyone is interested and able to try this out, the latest release is available at ftp://ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu/ucd-snmp.tar.gz Bug reports, and other comments regarding this implementation can be sent to the UCD coders mailing list ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu or (if sufficiently embarrassing to the quality of the code) direct to me. Dave Shield on behalf of the UCD AgentX implementation team. --==_Exmh_-11142415040 Content-Type: text/plain; name="README.agentx"; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: README.agentx Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="README.agentx" This sub-group of the UCD agent is a beta implementation of the AgentX agent extensibility protocol, as described in RFC2257, and extended in a current internet draft (June 1999) This is a reasonably full implementation, in as much as it supports all the protocol operations described in this document. However, it has not really been extensively tested - either across the full range of architectures of the main agent, or in terms of interoperability with other AgentX implementations. Testing has basically concentrated on ensuring correct operation between the UCD master and subagent code on the core development system (a Linux box, running RedHat 5.2 with kernel 2.0.36). It is quite likely that running this on other architectures, or against other AgentX implementations, will reveal outstanding problems, and it would be premature to rely on this release for a production system. Hopefully, experience gained with this code should result in a production-capable status fairly quickly. Although the basic operations are all supported, there are a number of areas that are known to be incomplete or missing. These include: - Contexts The UCD agent does not currently handle non-default contexts at all. The AgentX elements simply ignore the context field. - Repeated sub-agent failures If a GetNext request to a subagent fails to return an acceptable response, the request will then be passed on to the next MIB module. If this also fails to respond successfully, then the agent may not keep trying correctly. - Timeouts The master agent does not currently handle tardy responses from a subagent. The register of MIB regions does not record the associated timeouts. - GETNEXT ranges The end range of an AgentX GetNext request is not set correctly by the master agent, or interpreted by the subagent. - AgentX GETBULK The master agent will handle an SNMP GetBulk request using a sequence of AgentX GetNext calls. The subagent GetBulk handling _should_ work correctly, but this has not been tested. - AgentX MIB This has not yet been implemented. - Multiple sessions on a single connection This should work, but has not been tested. While these areas will need to be fixed before this implementation can be regarded as "finished", it was not felt worth delaying the release of the latest version until they could be handled correctly. The state of the AgentX implementation should be sufficiently useable for it to be worth releasing to a wider audience, in order to gather feedback and useability reports. To configure AgentX support into the UCD agent, run configure with the flag --with-mib-module="agentx", and compile the library and agent. Copy (or link) the 'snmpd' binary (the main master agent) to 'agentxd', which will run as a subagent. Note that the subagent will read the config file 'agentxd.conf' rather than the usual 'snmpd.conf', though the syntax and contents of this file work in precisely the same way. Please report any problems experienced to the ucd-snmp-coders list. Dave --==_Exmh_-11142415040-- From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Wed Feb 23 10:40:00 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24170 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:39:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id JAA25518; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 09:35:58 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id HAA22890 for agentx-list; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:20:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA22885 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:20:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id JAA19534 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 09:20:35 -0600 (CST) Received: from bnatale (ppp10.acec.com [38.249.211.63]) by relay1.acec.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA07028; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:19:27 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000223102023.00af2568@plymouth.acec.com> X-Sender: bnatale@plymouth.acec.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:26:13 -0500 To: Dave Shield From: Bob Natale Subject: Re: Set Processing Cc: ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu, agentx@dorothy.bmc.com In-Reply-To: <200002231127.LAA01182@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list At 2/23/2000:06:27 AM, Dave Shield wrote: Hi Dave, >I'm not quite sure how to fix it - I don't think it's something we >should rush into, without some deep thunks first (and maybe even a >design plan!) As you, Mike, and probably others have already noted, bolting on multi-threading to an already complex code base is not going to work. From experience, I can say that getting multi-threading right in a complex app (esp. one with many oopen interfaces to the outside world...where timing and data sync issues abound) is tough enough when starting from scratch at the design phase. >Short term, I think I'll hide behind the beta-nature of the AgentX >implementation :-) Well, speaking as chair of the AgentX WG, the open experimentation with the UCD AgentX code and the outstanding implementation feedback that you provide is the best thing happening to AgentX right now. True, a number of commercial implementations are available and, as far as I know, the product support behind them is excellent...but AgentX is still at the take-off stage and the kind of exposure your implementation is getting here is critically important. Keep up the great work!...and thanks. Cordially, BobN ------------ ISO 9001 Registered Quality Supplier ----------- Bob Natale | ACE*COMM | 301-721-3000 [v] Dir, Net Mgmt Prod | 704 Quince Orchard Rd | 301-721-3001 [f] bnatale@acecomm.com| Gaithersburg MD 20878 | www.acecomm.com ------------- Free downloads at www.winsnmp.com ------------- From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Wed Feb 23 11:05:07 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24707 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 11:05:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id KAA06419; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:03:33 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id HAA22968 for agentx-list; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:56:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo.bmc.com [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA22963 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 07:56:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id JAA03961 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 09:57:04 -0600 (CST) Received: from ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.124.242]) by mailhub1.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12Ne80-0001JZ-00; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 15:55:04 +0000 Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (root@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk [138.253.124.36]) by ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.8/LUCS-DTS-3.0M10) with ESMTP id PAA11518; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 15:55:03 GMT Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (daves@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.7/LUCS-DTS-3.0D9) with ESMTP id PAA02077; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 15:54:42 GMT Message-Id: <200002231554.PAA02077@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 To: Bob Natale Cc: ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu, agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Subject: Re: Set Processing In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:26:13 EST." <4.2.2.20000223102023.00af2568@plymouth.acec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 15:54:41 +0000 From: Dave Shield Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list > Well, speaking as chair of the AgentX WG, the open experimentation > with the UCD AgentX code and the outstanding implementation feedback > that you provide is the best thing happening to AgentX right now. Why thank you, kind sir. (shame it doesn't work properly!) > True, a number of commercial implementations are available and, as > far as I know, the product support behind them is excellent...but > AgentX is still at the take-off stage and the kind of exposure your > implementation is getting here is critically important. Keep up > the great work!...and thanks. I eagerly look forward to receiving interoperability reports from these other implementations. (This is known as a hint!) Dave From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Tue Feb 29 10:33:21 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA21081 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:33:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id JAA27805; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:29:43 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id HAA03166 for agentx-list; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA03161 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:20:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou2.bmc.com (fw-us-hou2.bmc.com [172.17.1.236]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id JAA24415 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:21:02 -0600 (CST) Received: from ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.124.242]) by mailhub1.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12PoOn-0002BZ-00; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:17:21 +0000 Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (root@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk [138.253.124.36]) by ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.8/LUCS-DTS-3.0M10) with ESMTP id PAA01053; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:17:21 GMT Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (daves@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.7/LUCS-DTS-3.0D9) with ESMTP id PAA00599; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:16:58 GMT Message-Id: <200002291516.PAA00599@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 To: Frank Fock Cc: muchow@dgii.com (Jim Muchow), ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu, agentx@dorothy.peer.com Subject: Re: Set Processing In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:18:22 +0100." <38BBAAFE.B27FAAD4@marconicomms.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:16:58 +0000 From: Dave Shield Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list > Unfortunately, I did not get the begin of this thread (was it posted > to the AgentX mailing list?). What is the problem with the SET request > processing? To generalise a bit on Jim's reply. He's been identifying a number of minor(-ish!) flaws in the details of the UCD agent inplementation. This particular thread refers to the handling of SET failures (which did work initially, but got broken during the run up to the latest release). I'm currently using the defense of this being "barely-beta" code :-) > Until now, I only tested AgentX++ masters against AgentX++ sub-agents. > It would be helpful to know what I have to expect from the UCD agent > when doing my first tests ;-) That sounds familiar. Until now, all the UCD AgentX testing has been against UCD subagents as well. I've tried to lay out the known deficiencies and flaws in the README file that comes with the UCD source code for the AgentX module. Very simply, I believe that we've implemented the all operations of the AgentX protocol to *some* extent (though not necessarily completely). So if you try something, you've got a sporting chance of it working! What happens in practise, of course, may be a different kettle of fish altogether! I look forward to hearing your experiences. Dave From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Tue Feb 29 11:43:22 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24545 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 11:43:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id KAA26750; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:40:09 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id IAA03373 for agentx-list; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:37:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id IAA03368 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id KAA26128 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:38:25 -0600 (CST) Received: from ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.124.242]) by mailhub2.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12PpeX-00011i-00; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:37:41 +0000 Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (root@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk [138.253.124.36]) by ribble.server.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.8/LUCS-DTS-3.0M10) with ESMTP id QAA03356; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:37:40 GMT Received: from daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (daves@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk (8.8.7/LUCS-DTS-3.0D9) with ESMTP id QAA00864; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:37:17 GMT Message-Id: <200002291637.QAA00864@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 To: Frank Fock Cc: agentx@dorothy.peer.com, ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu Subject: Re: Set Processing In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:14:38 +0100." <38BBF06E.E521D80@marconicomms.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:37:12 +0000 From: Dave Shield Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list > I have read the README when 4.1 has been released. I just wondered if there > is additionally information available. "Information" ? - whaddaya want information for? You've got the source! But no - there's nothing really in addition to the README, or asking me. Nothing significant should have changed between 4.1 and 4.1.1 - that was purely a bug-fix release. > I have one question about the AgentX MIB implementation: Ah! Errr.... I do wish you hadn't said that. When I said we'd implemented all the operations "of the protocol", that's exactly what I meant. The MIB is one of those things that didn't get done before the release date. Sorry! > When setting the > admin status of a session to down(2), is the corresponding row supposed > to be deleted from the agentxSessionTable or should it remain forever in > its current (down) configuration? > > Because a session could not be reestablished by management, I would expect > the row to disappear. On the other hand, my current implementation does not > remove the row, just because its easier to implement ;-). What do you > think? I haven't read the MIB specification in detail recently (since I've been concentrating on getting the protocol done), but since there are advantages of doing it both ways, I'd be inclined to invoke that handy phrase "implementation dependent". As far as the UCD implementation is concerned, the natural way to handle this (i.e. what I'm planning to write when I get around to it) would mean that rows would disappear when the session was closed - however this was done. But obviously, I'd have to pore over the specs first to check this was legit. Dave From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Tue Feb 29 13:06:57 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-1.bmc.com [198.207.223.250]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27386 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 13:06:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA25903; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:04:50 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA03704 for agentx-list; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:02:43 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rpresuhn@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA03698 for agentx@dorothy.bmc.com; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:02:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:02:39 -0800 (PST) From: Randy Presuhn Message-Id: <200002291802.KAA03698@dorothy.bmc.com> To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com Subject: fwd: Re: Set Processing Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi - Here is a relevant agentx forwarded post from a non-subscriber address. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Randy Presuhn randy_presuhn@bmc.com http://www.bmc.com/ Voice: +1 408 546-1006 BMC Software, Inc. 1-3141 2141 N. First Street Fax: +1 408 965-0359 San Jose, California 95131 USA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Any relationship between my opinions and BMC's should be coincidental. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo [172.17.7.166]) > by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id DAA02736 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 03:17:01 -0800 (PST) > Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) > by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id FAA27536 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 05:17:35 -0600 (CST) > Received: (from uucp@localhost) > by gwa2.fe.bosch.de (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA10303 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:17:55 +0100 (MET) > Received: from fez7358.fe.bosch.de( 10.8.1.102) by gwa2.fe.bosch.de via smap (V2.1) > id xma010057; Tue, 29 Feb 00 12:17:23 +0100 > Received: from leto.bk.bosch.de ([150.249.0.35]) by zeus.bk.bosch.de > (Netscape Messaging Server 3.0) with ESMTP id AAA17044; > Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:17:02 +0100 > Received: from marconicomms.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by leto.bk.bosch.de (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA19791; > Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:18:23 +0100 (MET) > Sender: fock@leto.bk.bosch.de > Message-ID: <38BBAAFE.B27FAAD4@marconicomms.com> > Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:18:22 +0100 > From: Frank Fock > Organization: Marconi Communications Software Systems GmbH & Co. KG > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) > X-Accept-Language: en > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: Dave Shield > CC: ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu, agentx@dorothy.peer.com > Subject: Re: Set Processing > References: <200002231554.PAA02077@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi, > > I am currently finishing my work on the AgentX implementation for > AGENT++. There are a lot of things to be tested! So, an alpha > release won't be available before April. Nevertheless, I would like > to use the UCD AgentX implementation for my first inter operability > testing. > > Unfortunately, I did not get the begin of this thread (was it posted > to the AgentX mailing list?). What is the problem with the SET request > processing? > > Until now, I only tested AgentX++ masters against AgentX++ sub-agents. > It would be helpful to know what I have to expect from the UCD agent > when doing my first tests ;-) > > I agree with Bob, that the UCD AgentX implementation is a very valuable > work, which will help the AgentX community deploying this protocol. > > TIA, > Frank Fock > > > Dave Shield wrote: > > > > > Well, speaking as chair of the AgentX WG, the open experimentation > > > with the UCD AgentX code and the outstanding implementation feedback > > > that you provide is the best thing happening to AgentX right now. > > > > > > Why thank you, kind sir. > > > > (shame it doesn't work properly!) > > > > > True, a number of commercial implementations are available and, as > > > far as I know, the product support behind them is excellent...but > > > AgentX is still at the take-off stage and the kind of exposure your > > > implementation is getting here is critically important. Keep up > > > the great work!...and thanks. > > > > I eagerly look forward to receiving interoperability reports > > from these other implementations. (This is known as a hint!) > > > > Dave > From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Tue Feb 29 13:07:30 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-1.bmc.com [198.207.223.250]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27424 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 13:07:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA26175; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:06:11 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA03743 for agentx-list; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:04:33 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rpresuhn@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA03723 for agentx@dorothy.bmc.com; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:04:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:04:29 -0800 (PST) From: Randy Presuhn Message-Id: <200002291804.KAA03723@dorothy.bmc.com> To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com Subject: fwd: Re: Set Processing Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi - Yet another non-subscriber post... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Randy Presuhn randy_presuhn@bmc.com http://www.bmc.com/ Voice: +1 408 546-1006 BMC Software, Inc. 1-3141 2141 N. First Street Fax: +1 408 965-0359 San Jose, California 95131 USA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Any relationship between my opinions and BMC's should be coincidental. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo [172.17.7.166]) > by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id GAA03093 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 06:39:06 -0800 (PST) > Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) > by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id IAA09479 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:39:41 -0600 (CST) > Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:38:43 -0600 (CST) > Message-Id: <200002291438.IAA23492@poe.digi.com> > From: muchow@dgii.com (Jim Muchow) > To: frank.fock@marconicomms.com > CC: D.T.Shield@csc.liv.ac.uk, ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu, > agentx@dorothy.peer.com > In-reply-to: <38BBAAFE.B27FAAD4@marconicomms.com> (message from Frank Fock on > Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:18:22 +0100) > Subject: Re: Set Processing > Reply-to: muchow@dgii.com > References: <200002231554.PAA02077@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> <38BBAAFE.B27FAAD4@marconicomms.com> > > > Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:18:22 +0100 > From: Frank Fock > > Unfortunately, I did not get the begin of this thread (was it > posted to the AgentX mailing list?). What is the problem with the > SET request processing? > > It's my fault. My situation may not be valid for all. I linked up to > AgentX code using in a manner similar to that found in example.c or > the AgentX tutorial. > > I discovered that a set request with a varbind in error (in my tests, > specifying an illegal or out-of-range value) doesn't return an error. I > also discovered that SNMPv1 gets with errors return an SNMPv1 response > with a SNMPv2 varbind error (noSuchInstance). Sets and gets that do > not have errors are fine. > > I know where (and how) these are caused in the code. I just don't know > how to fix them - well, I know how to hack them, I just don't know how > to fix them correctly. > > I also discovered that the code always operates in little-endian mode, > but through some "magic" that I was unable to discern, it doesn't > matter. > > -- > Jim Muchow (612)912-3196 > Now Suffering as Mr. SNMP fax: (612)912-4954 > Digi International muchow@dgii.com > I used to be disgusted and now I try to be amused. [Elvis Costello] > From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Tue Feb 29 13:13:50 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27605 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 13:13:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA28141; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:12:20 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA03973 for agentx-list; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:10:41 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rpresuhn@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA03950 for agentx@dorothy.bmc.com; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:10:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:10:36 -0800 (PST) From: Randy Presuhn Message-Id: <200002291810.KAA03950@dorothy.bmc.com> To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com Subject: Fwd: Re: Set Processing Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi - Still another post from a non-subscriber address. (Yes, I've added these addresses to the "posters" list, but it looks like folks have been busy sending messages. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Randy Presuhn randy_presuhn@bmc.com http://www.bmc.com/ Voice: +1 408 546-1006 BMC Software, Inc. 1-3141 2141 N. First Street Fax: +1 408 965-0359 San Jose, California 95131 USA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Any relationship between my opinions and BMC's should be coincidental. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo [172.17.7.166]) > by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id IAA03289 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 08:13:01 -0800 (PST) > Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) > by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id KAA16537 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:13:35 -0600 (CST) > Received: (from uucp@localhost) > by gwa2.fe.bosch.de (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA24183 > for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:13:56 +0100 (MET) > Received: from fez7358.fe.bosch.de( 10.8.1.102) by gwa2.fe.bosch.de via smap (V2.1) > id xma023809; Tue, 29 Feb 00 17:13:39 +0100 > Received: from leto.bk.bosch.de ([150.249.0.35]) by zeus.bk.bosch.de > (Netscape Messaging Server 3.0) with ESMTP id AAA18589; > Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:13:19 +0100 > Received: from marconicomms.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by leto.bk.bosch.de (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA19966; > Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:14:39 +0100 (MET) > Sender: fock@leto.bk.bosch.de > Message-ID: <38BBF06E.E521D80@marconicomms.com> > Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:14:38 +0100 > From: Frank Fock > Organization: Marconi Communications Software Systems GmbH & Co. KG > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) > X-Accept-Language: en > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: Dave Shield > CC: Jim Muchow , ucd-snmp-coders@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu, > agentx@dorothy.peer.com > Subject: Re: Set Processing > References: <200002291516.PAA00599@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Dave Shield wrote: > > To generalise a bit on Jim's reply. > > He's been identifying a number of minor(-ish!) flaws in the details > > of the UCD agent inplementation. This particular thread refers to > > the handling of SET failures (which did work initially, but got broken > > during the run up to the latest release). > > > > I'm currently using the defense of this being "barely-beta" code :-) > > > > No problem ;-), essential is that it shows how it works and that AgentX > works. > > > > > I've tried to lay out the known deficiencies and flaws in the README > > file that comes with the UCD source code for the AgentX module. > > Very simply, I believe that we've implemented the all operations of the > > AgentX protocol to *some* extent (though not necessarily completely). > > So if you try something, you've got a sporting chance of it working! > > > > I have read the README when 4.1 has been released. I just wondered if there > is additionally information available. I will test against the UCD > implementation within the next two or three weeks. First, I have to > make my code as clean as possible. > > > What happens in practise, of course, may be a different kettle of fish > > altogether! > > > > I am curious about what will happen! I see a good chance, that it will > work right from the start. > > > I look forward to hearing your experiences. > > > > Sure, I will send you my experiences made during inter operability testing. > > I have one question about the AgentX MIB implementation: When setting the > admin status of a session to down(2), is the corresponding row supposed > to be deleted from the agentxSessionTable or should it remain forever in > its current (down) configuration? > > Because a session could not be reestablished by management, I would expect > the row to disappear. On the other hand, my current implementation does not > remove the row, just because its easier to implement ;-). What do you > think? > > > TIA, > Frank > > -- > Frank Fock Marconi Communications Software Systems > Blumenstrasse 22-24, > Phone: +49 7191 13-4851 71522 Backnang, > Fax: +49 7191 13-2502 Germany > From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Tue Feb 29 21:34:33 2000 Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (fw-us-hou-2.bmc.com [198.207.223.251]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA06817 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:34:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.peer.com (dorothy.bmc.com [192.146.153.65]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id UAA21759; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 20:31:41 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.peer.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id SAA20339 for agentx-list; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:29:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from tangelo.bmc.com (root@tangelo [172.17.7.166]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id SAA20322 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:29:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw-us-hou1.bmc.com (fw-us-hou1.bmc.com [172.17.0.250]) by tangelo.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with SMTP id UAA21336 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 20:29:45 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (briani@localhost) by draco.led.ufsc.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA10553; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:39:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:39:04 -0300 (EST) From: Alexandre Briani Kieling To: agentx@dorothy.peer.com cc: ucd-snmp@ucd-snmp.ucdavis.edu Subject: agentx X pure snmp Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list I have been studying the agentX protocol for six months and I am starting to write a document about this technology. But I can not just talk about theory. I need to validate what I say. I mean, if I say that extensible agents are better than monolitic agents, I have to prove this. Is the implementation of extensible agents easier than the traditional way of implement snmp agents? Is there a way to determine the time spent developing subagents and snmp agents. Is it true that many subagents have better performance than one big snmp agent? Is it better to develop a new module and compile it with a existent snmp agent like ucd-snmp or is it better to develop a extensible agent using agentX? I am not sure about it. Is there any way I can prove that agentX is better? What I am asking here is a suggestion about how I can compare the two technologies and validate the results. Could anyone who developed a extensible agent tell me what type of information the agent was managing? Is there any situation where only extensible agents can do the job? I do not mean to bother you with so many questions. I would really appreciate any hint. Thanks for your time. -- Alexandre Briani Kieling Laboratory of Distance Learning Federal University of Santa Catarina Brazil