Is there any way to get the status of the registration of scalar in net-snmp ?
In my case there are around 14 scalars and registration of those taking time and returning "no such object found" error when I issue snmpget on localhost for ~5 seconds after target configuration and later the reply for snmpget is positive.
Should I keep snmpd in disabled state till the registration of scalars is done ?
Thanks in advance !
Related
OpenNMS is receiving the following traps from a F5 load balancer:
uei.opennms.org/generic/traps/EnterpriseDefault
Received unformatted enterprise event (enterprise:.1.3.6.1.4.1.3375.2.4 generic:6 specific:131). 2 args: .1.3.6.1.4.1.3375.2.4.1.1="Pool member 10.4.7.72:0 exceeded configured rate limit." .1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.3.0=".1.3.6.1.4.1.3375.2.4"
<event>
<mask>
<maskelement>
<mename>id</mename>
<mevalue>.1.3.6.1.4.1.3375.2.4</mevalue>
</maskelement>
<maskelement>
<mename>generic</mename>
<mevalue>6</mevalue>
</maskelement>
<maskelement>
<mename>specific</mename>
<mevalue>131</mevalue>
</maskelement>
</mask>
<uei>uei.opennms.org/traps/F5-BIGIP-COMMON-MIB/bigipMemberRate</uei>
<event-label>F5-BIGIP-COMMON-MIB defined trap event: bigipMemberRate</event-label>
<descr><p>A pool member has exceeded the allowed rate.</p><table>
<tr><td><b>
bigipNotifyObjMsg</b></td><td>
%parm[#1]%;</td><td><p></p></td></tr></table>
</descr>
<logmsg dest="logndisplay"><p>
bigipMemberRate trap received
bigipNotifyObjMsg=%parm[#1]%</p>
</logmsg>
<severity>Major</severity>
</event>
The above is from "/opt/opennms/etc/events# less F5-BIGIP-COMMON-MIB.events.xml", which is already defined in "eventconf.xml":
pd11scl-nms-w01:/opt/opennms/etc# grep F5 eventconf.xml
<event-file>events/F5-BIGIP-COMMON-MIB.events.xml</event-file>
<event-file>events/F5.events.xml</event-file>
pd11scl-nms-w01:/opt/opennms/etc#
I have restarted OpenNMS multiple times, but still the traps are not recognized as a F5 one.
Any thoughts? Any quick suggestion is greatly appreciated as we have been struggling that for quite some time and not sure what's wrong here.
I think you need to add the events tag around the event tag in the clip above.
I'm getting error for "SNMPv3" of invalid engine ID? what causes this error usually?
it perfectly works when i select no auth,no priv. but for other two options of auth,no priv and auth,priv it gives error of invalid engine id.
ManageEngine MibBrowser supports auto-discovery of SnmpEngineID, EngineBoots and EngineTime from an Authoritative SNMP Engine.
If user has enabled the "Set EngineID For Adding V3 entry" and entered SNMPV3 user details with EngineID parameter, MibBrowser displays the message received from Agent.
As per RFC3414, If the value of the msgAuthoritativeEngineID
field in the securityParameters is unknown then:
a) a non-authoritative SNMP engine that performs discovery may
optionally create a new entry in its Local Configuration Datastore
(LCD) and continue processing;
or
b) the usmStatsUnknownEngineIDs counter is incremented, and an error
indication (unknownEngineID) together with the OID and value of the
incremented counter are returned to the calling module.
Note in the event that a zero-length or other illegally sized
msgAuthoritativeEngineID is received,b) should be chosen to facilitate
engineID discovery. Otherwise, the choice between a) and b) is an
implementation issue.
If Authoritative SNMP Engine returns "unKnownEngineID OID"(.1.3.6.1.6.3.15.1.1.4.0) with incremental counter value to manager. Then, Mibbrowser displays the "Invalid EngineID" error.
Regards,
ManageEngine
I'm currently coding an app that utilizes Parse as a backend, but have run into a '124' error. I admit that I do a lot in my cloud functions, but, from what I've observed, it doesn't appear over 15 seconds. Could someone please confirm this? Below is the output.
E2015-03-06T03:49:52.644Z] v286: Ran cloud function createEvent for
user puZNjFVfSm with:
Input:
{"RSVPDate":{"__type":"Date","iso":"2015-03-06T04:49:52.000Z"},"description":"Sample event to showcase
functionality","group":{"max":5,"min":4},"max":50,"reoccur":{"day":1,"month":1,"stop":{"__type":"Date","iso":"2015-03-06T04:49:52.000Z"},"week":1},"title":"SampleFCFS"}
Failed with: Execution timed out I2015-03-06T03:49:52.716Z] begin
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.717Z] creating Event - initial checks completed
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.718Z] Finished advanced checks
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.719Z] Event creation start
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.770Z] begin event creation
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.873Z] Finding role: company_employee_z0Zx39OyuY
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.875Z] Added and secured event
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.931Z] attaching role to 425Qy9v9e4
I2015-03-06T03:49:52.934Z] Adding participant
From what I can tell, it looks like I'm only getting 300Z (is that milliseconds?) on all my runs. Shouldn't I be getting 15 seconds?
Update: I found that the issue was caused by using the addUnique function of Parse Objects with an array of pointers. By inserting ids instead of pointers, the issue was resolved.
Thank you for your help.
I've faced with the strange situation. When connected to the Google Play Services I request the array of Achievements calling GamesClient.loadAchievements(this, true); In onAchievementsLoaded() method I see that all my achievements are of correct type. To ensure I call Achievement.getType() and for each of my achievement it returns Achievement.TYPE_INCREMENTAL.
The problem arrives when I'm trying to increment any of my achievements by 1 using
GamesClient.incrementAchievementImmediate(this, id, 1);
In onAchievementUpdated() I receive statusCode 3002 (STATUS_ACHIEVEMENT_NOT_INCREMENTAL).
I'm in total frustration. The matter is that all achievements initially were of other type (not incremental), but then in dev console the type has been changed. 2 days passed since that.
It was my mistake, I've reviewed my code once again and found that I was sending wrong achievement id. But Google guys do ugly too - they report wrong status code for that. The response should be STATUS_ACHIEVEMENT_UNKNOWN, according to documentation. I was receiving 3002 STATUS_ACHIEVEMENT_NOT_INCREMENTAL instead, which confused me a lot.
I am having one MIB SAF-CKPT-MIB
When I am trying the command
snmpget -v2c -c public -mALL (IP_address) SAF-CKPT-MIB::saCkptCheckpointMaxSectionSize.14.118.100.115.95.118.100.101.115.116.95.100.98.95.49 SAF-CKPT-MIB::saCkptNodeReplicaType.14.118.100.115.95.118.100.101.115.116.95.100.98.95.49.14.115.97.102.78.111.100.101.61.83.67.95.50.95.50
I am getting the message "Timeout: No Response from IP_address"
When I am changing the order like
snmpget -v2c -c public -mALL (IP_address) SAF-CKPT-MIB::saCkptNodeReplicaType.14.118.100.115.95.118.100.101.115.116.95.100.98.95.49.14.115.97.102.78.111.100.101.61.83.67.95.50.95.50 SAF-CKPT-MIB::saCkptCheckpointMaxSectionSize.14.118.100.115.95.118.100.101.115.116.95.100.98.95.49
It is working fine .....
My question is how this changing the order is making difference here ??
I hope my question is clear ...
The message "Timeout: No Response from IP_address" is indicating that the snmp server at IP_address is not responding within the timeout period that snmpget is using (iirc it's 5 seconds by default).
Either the snmp server at IP_address is not responding at all in the first instance or is responding too slowly. This can be tested by increasing the timeout. eg:
snmpget -v2c -c public -mALL -t 60 (IP_address)
Of course it could also be tested by capturing the packets using Wireshark as suggested by Lex Li.
Any change in behaviour due to the order of the MIB variables in the request sounds like a problem in the implementation of this MIB at the snmp server.
Rarely saw such order related issue, as generally speaking the order does not have an impact on the resulting SNMP packets. But of course, capturing network traffic with either Wireshark or Microsoft Network Monitor can show some hints under the hood.
Lex Li
http://sharpsnmplib.codeplex.com