--> wes has joined #net-snmp
--> delanne has joined #net-snmp
[2003/05/07 07:27:00] #net-snmp <delanne> hi
[2003/05/07 07:30:05] #net-snmp <delanne> in RFC1067, I read :
[2003/05/07 07:30:07] #net-snmp <delanne> An implementation of this protocol need not accept messages whose length exceeds 484 octets.
[2003/05/07 07:30:07] #net-snmp <delanne> is 484octets the max len of PDU ? or the total lenght of the SNMP messages (including : version ID and community name ) ?
[2003/05/07 07:30:59] #net-snmp <delanne> (is this always true with SNMPv2c and SNMPv3 ? )
--> rstory has joined #net-snmp
[2003/05/07 07:42:01] #net-snmp <delanne> hi rstory
[2003/05/07 07:42:20] #net-snmp <delanne> in RFC1067, I read :
[2003/05/07 07:42:20] #net-snmp <delanne> An implementation of this protocol need not accept messages whose length exceeds 484 octets.
[2003/05/07 07:42:20] #net-snmp <delanne> is 484octets the max len of PDU ? or the total lenght of the SNMP messages (including : version ID and community name ) ?
[2003/05/07 07:43:34] #net-snmp <rstory> it's the minimum PDU size an agent MUST accept
[2003/05/07 07:45:16] #net-snmp <delanne> minimum ?
[2003/05/07 07:45:19] #net-snmp <delanne> ok
--> delanne_ has joined #net-snmp
[2003/05/07 08:17:20] #net-snmp <delanne_> bye
--> BillGatesOfBorg has joined #net-snmp
--> TrogL has joined #net-snmp
[2003/05/07 10:22:04] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> Hey guys... question... is the stuff in the at mib-II group a proper subset of the stuff in the ipNetToMediaTable table, in ip?
[2003/05/07 10:36:00] #net-snmp <wes> BillGatesOfBorg: um, the other way around. mib-II is the original document. The ipNetToMediaTable came later in the history time line.
--> benr has joined #net-snmp
[2003/05/07 11:07:14] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> wes: actually, I meant... the mib-2.at group...
[2003/05/07 11:07:49] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> as in... is the information found there a proper subset of the information found in mib-w.ip.ipNetToMediaTable
[2003/05/07 11:08:35] #net-snmp <wes> well, mib-2 is an old term is what I mean. THere is no "mib-2" anymore. There are lots of MIBS which make up what used to be the old mib-2 tree.
[2003/05/07 11:08:52] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> it "appears" to me that the only difference is the addition of the type row in ipNetToMediaTable.
[2003/05/07 11:09:02] #net-snmp <wes> right.
[2003/05/07 11:09:06] #net-snmp <wes> it's a replacement.
[2003/05/07 11:09:14] #net-snmp <wes> "improved"
[2003/05/07 11:09:20] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> wes: oh... I see...
[2003/05/07 11:10:06] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> cuz I take it that net-snmp (linux version) is basically translating a call for mib-2.at information to be a "reduced" call to get information from the (possibly cached) ipNetToMediaTable?
[2003/05/07 11:10:26] #net-snmp <BillGatesOfBorg> it makes sense, actually, to put it in ip... hehe
--> miike has joined #net-snmp
--> _BahdKo_ has joined #net-snmp
[2003/05/07 21:57:32] #net-snmp <_BahdKo_> hi
[2003/05/07 22:03:06] #net-snmp <_BahdKo_> Has anyone experienced an inability to monitor more than 10 hard disks with net-snmpd? I'm working through some weirdness on this one server, and am trying to narrow it down. I am attempting to monitor 14 disks total, kernel is 2.4.18-27.7, and the disks are a mix of NAS and normal disks. I seem able to succesfully monitor 10 of them.
[2003/05/07 22:48:26] #net-snmp <wes> you should be able to monitor whatever is in the config.h file, which in net-snmp 5.0.8 is 50
[2003/05/07 23:14:50] #net-snmp <_BahdKo_> ok thanks
[2003/05/07 23:15:09] #net-snmp <_BahdKo_> oops