Re: Problem with defining custom data type (TEXTUAL-CONVENTION)

This is a discussion on Re: Problem with defining custom data type (TEXTUAL-CONVENTION) within the SNMP Users forums, part of the Networking and Network Related category; On 21/01/2008, Manfred Wassmann <manolo@ncc-1701.b.shuttle.de> wrote: > I actually have at ...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > Networking and Network Related > SNMP Users

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008
Dave Shield
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Problem with defining custom data type (TEXTUAL-CONVENTION)

On 21/01/2008, Manfred Wassmann <manolo@ncc-1701.b.shuttle.de> wrote:
> I actually have at least two instances of myVersion
> but they have to have different access clauses, so I guess I can't put
> them into one table.


Not so - remember that the access clause is actually MAX-ACCESS.
So you could have a MAX-ACCESS of read-write (or read-create) for
the column object, and explain any further restrictions in the relevant
description field.

It's a bit difficult to give more precise advise without knowing more
about what exactly you are trying to do.

> Yet I wonder why I can't combine them into a third entity like
> it is done in the UCD-SNMP-MIB:
>
> logMatchEntry OBJECT-TYPE
> SYNTAX LogMatchEntry
> [...]
> LogMatchEntry ::=
> SEQUENCE {
> logMatchIndex
> Integer32,
> [...]


As Mike has said, this is part of a table.
SNMP MIB structures can be either standalone scalar objects,
or tables - a set of nested definition of the form

xxxTable ... SEQUENCE OF XxxEntry ...
xxxEntry ... XxxEntry ...
XxxEntry ::= SEQUENCE { ..... }
(followed by the column objects).

These are the *only* two data structures supported in SNMP.
(Being part of the "Simple" aspect of things).


There was talk a few years ago about re-working the SMI specs
to support more complex structures, but that came to nothing.

In practise, scalar objects and tables (together with appropriate
descriptions and Textual Conventions) are sufficient to handle
most requirements. Though this does rely on application/agent
designers looking at the defined semantics of a given MIB - not
just the basic syntax.


Dave

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...net-snmp-users
Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0