Displaying sysORTable - SNMP

This is a discussion on Displaying sysORTable - SNMP ; HI, some routers/switches (Cisco3520, 3Com SuperStack II and PowerConnect 3024) are not displaying sysORTable but, Linux and cabletron routers display sysORTable. I couldn't find any information for display/not to diplay the sysORTable in standrard RFC's. which is correct? Thanks in ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Displaying sysORTable

  1. Displaying sysORTable

    HI,
    some routers/switches (Cisco3520, 3Com SuperStack II and PowerConnect
    3024) are not displaying sysORTable but, Linux and cabletron routers
    display sysORTable.
    I couldn't find any information for display/not to diplay the
    sysORTable in standrard RFC's.

    which is correct?

    Thanks in advance

  2. Re: Displaying sysORTable

    Kamaraj wrote:
    > HI,
    > some routers/switches (Cisco3520, 3Com SuperStack II and PowerConnect
    > 3024) are not displaying sysORTable but, Linux and cabletron routers
    > display sysORTable.
    > I couldn't find any information for display/not to diplay the
    > sysORTable in standrard RFC's.


    I think you ask about implementation of the sysORTable. RFC 3418 says
    that sysORLastChange, sysORID, sysORUpTime, sysORDescr belong into the
    systemGroup and snmpBasicCompliance and snmpBasicComplianceRev2 both
    require that the systemGroup is implemented. So the RFC is rather clear
    that boxes which claim to conform to RFC 3418 (STD 62) have to implement
    the sysORTable.

    On the other hand, you may also want to re-read the specification of
    these objects and then you will find out that the commonly used NETSNMP
    implementation (although useful) is not really correct. Proposals to
    legalize something close to the NETSNMP interpretation failed within
    the IETF.

    /js

    --
    Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

+ Reply to Thread