http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2236 <pre>Hi Frank, Thanks for your response. According to instrumentation guide I am updating the table model before the request is processed based on external event. Our table will be small tables doesn't exceed 20 row max. The problem we are having is not with the order, it is actually with the content. I have a test data as follow: Set1: Component_set1_1 Component_set1_2 Component_set1_3 Set2: Component_set2_1 Component_set2_2 Component_set2_3 When I send a request from a Mib browser, the table content gets mixed. For example the data in the table could be something like that: Component_set1_1 Component_set2_2 Component_set1_3 Which is not what I have expected as my model should have either Set1 or Set2 but not mix of both. As you know I am implementing MOServerLookupListener interface and in queryEvent(MOServerLookupEvent event) I am building my table model. I know queryEvent method get called multiple times based on number of columns and rows, and maybe that's why I am getting mixed results even though I am clearing the model. I am sure I am doing something wrong, and appricate your help. Thanks. AF On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Frank Fock &lt;fock-uhZIdBdo/7ZBDgjK7y7TUQ&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; wrote: </pre> Aiman Farhat 2013-05-03T09:57:22 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2228 <pre>I am a little confused by this change. We have run into this issue, with a sporadic socket closed exception, the cause of which we have not been able to identify. What we are seeing is that the new behavior results in a busy-loop, since we go right back to a receive that is guaranteed to fail. This strikes me as a case where we need to either remediate the socket directly, or cancel the listener. What am I missing? Regards, Kelly. On 12.07.2011 14:02, Fock, Frank wrote: </pre> Kelly Dyer 2013-04-30T21:05:59 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2225 <pre>Hello, In order to remotely change the authentication password of a user I do the following steps: 1. Get the usmUsrSpinLock.0 and save in sValue 2. I obtain the old key of the user whose password I want to change as follows: byte[] oldKey = snmp.getUSM().getUser(engineId, new OctetString(user)).getUsmUser().getAuthenticationPassphrase(); 3. Then I generate the new key as follows: byte[] newKey = SecurityProtocols.getInstance().passwordToKey(AuthMD5.ID, new OctetString(newPassword), engineId.toByteArray()); 4. Then I generate the key change value as follows: byte[] keyChange = new AuthMD5().changeDelta(oldKey, newKey, random.getBytes()); 5. And finally I do a SET to the usmUserTable: SET(usmUserSpinLock.0=sValue, usmUserAuthKeyChange=keyChange, usmUserPublic=random) When I read the usmUserTable MIB table after the SET I can see the random value in the usmUserPublic column, however when I do a request using the new password the agent responds that the password is not correct. Am I missing something in the password change procedure? I have tried to follow the procedure described in RFC 3414 (KeyChange). Best regards, Roger Vilagut Abad ________________________________ Este correo electr?nico y, en su caso, cualquier fichero anexo al mismo, contiene informaci?n de car?cter confidencial exclusivamente dirigida a su destinatario o destinatarios. Si no es vd. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado que la lectura, utilizaci?n, divulgaci?n y/o copia sin autorizaci?n est? prohibida en virtud de la legislaci?n vigente. En el caso de haber recibido este correo electr?nico por error, se ruega notificar inmediatamente esta circunstancia mediante reenv?o a la direcci?n electr?nica del remitente. Evite imprimir este mensaje si no es estrictamente necesario. This email and any file attached to it (when applicable) contain(s) confidential information that is exclusively addressed to its recipient(s). If you are not the indicated recipient, you are informed that reading, using, disseminating and/or copying it without authorisation is forbidden in accordance with the legislation in effect. If you have received this email by mistake, please immediately notify the sender of the situation by resending it to their email address. Avoid printing this message if it is not absolutely necessary. </pre> Vilagut Abad, Roger 2013-04-17T11:58:14 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2223 <pre>Let's say I have a community user with a name like "public", which is associated with a v3 user security name for compatibility purposes. Does SNMP4j somehow support explicitly sending a trap on behalf of "public", so that trap-receivers with v1/2c authentication can recognize it? Thanks </pre> m k 2013-04-16T14:40:31 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2221 <pre>We have been tasked to create an SNMP agent for our application. Our application can have multiple instances within the same JVM, and we have been able to create an agent using MOTables that shows each instance as a row in a table to the Network Manager. However we are struggling with how to go about intercepting the 'getValue' or 'setValue' to each cell in this table as we have been able to do quite easily for MOScalar - by simply subclassing it and over-riding the getValue and setValue methods. We don't see the analogue for the MOScalar getValue/setValue in DefaultMOTable. So, we tried using VariantVariable for each cell in the table. However, we have found that the VariantVariable is overwritten when a set is received by the SNMP4J from the NetworkManager. So, the VariantVariableCallback 'updateVariable' works well, until a 'set' is received from the Network Manager -- after which the VariantVariableCallback stops working because the VariableVariable object appears to have been de-referenced. What is the best way to implement this scenario such that we can intercept the sets and gets to each cell in the table? Brad Charan FPX LLC Bloomington, MN, USA This message may contain confidential information, if you are not the intended addressee, please inform us immediately that you have received this e-mail in error, and delete it. We thank you for your cooperation. </pre> Charan, Brad 2013-04-04T16:32:12 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2212 <pre>Dear colleagues, I create a very simple scalar in my agent: OID oidTest = new OID("1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0"); MOScalar sysScalarTest = new MOScalar(oidTest, MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ_WRITE, new Integer32(15)); server.registerManagedObject(sysScalarTest); and then would like to change its value remotely using the MIB browser. What I get back on the debug in Eclipse is the "Error 'Authorization error' generated at: 1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0 = 123" preceded by debug information about the message exchange and status exchange between agent and MIB browser. Everything seems fine, i.e., "private" community is found, request with the private scope was created and proper object was found. However, when time to change came around, no change was done. =========================================================== 20353 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping - Received message from localhost/127.0.0.1/56019 with length 45: 30:2b:02:01:01:04:07:70:72:69:76:61:74:65:a3:1d:02:04:5a:ad:24:55:02:01:00:0 2:01:00:30:0f:30:0d:06:08:2b:06:01:03:16:01:05:00:02:01:7b 20354 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.Snmp - Fire process PDU event: CommandResponderEvent[securityModel=2, securityLevel=1, maxSizeResponsePDU=65535, pduHandle=PduHandle[1521296469], stateReference=StateReference[msgID=0,pduHandle=PduHandle[1521296469],securi tyEngineID=null,securityModel=null,securityName=private,securityLevel=1,cont extEngineID=null,contextName=null,retryMsgIDs=null], pdu=SET[requestID=1521296469, errorStatus=Success(0), errorIndex=0, VBS[1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0 = 123]], messageProcessingModel=1, securityName=private, processed=false, peerAddress=127.0.0.1/56019, transportMapping=org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping&lt; at &gt;36c8e545, tmStateReference=null] 20354 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.SnmpCommunityMIB - Looking up coexistence info for 'private' 20355 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.SnmpCommunityMIB - Found coexistence info for 'private'=CoexistenceInfo[securityName=cprivate,contextEngineID=80:00:13:70: 01:c0:a8:01:04,contextName=private,transportTag=] 20356 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.SnmpCommunityMIB - Address 127.0.0.1/56019 passes filter, because source address filtering is disabled 20356 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest - Created subrequest 0 with scope org.snmp4j.agent.DefaultMOContextScope[context=private,lowerBound=1.3.6.1.3. 22.1.5.0,lowerIncluded=true,upperBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0,upperIncluded=true ] from 1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0 = 123 20356 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest - SnmpSubRequests initialized: [org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest$SnmpSubRequest[scope=org.snmp4j.agent. DefaultMOContextScope[context=private,lowerBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0,lowerInc luded=true,upperBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0,upperIncluded=true],vb=1.3.6.1.3.22 .1.5.0 = 123,status=org.snmp4j.agent.request.RequestStatus&lt; at &gt;6ceac619,query=null,index= 0,targetMO=null]] 20358 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2001] DEBUG org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping - Sending message to 127.0.0.1/56019 with length 45: 30:2b:02:01:01:04:07:70:72:69:76:61:74:65:a2:1d:02:04:5a:ad:24:55:02:01:10:0 2:01:01:30:0f:30:0d:06:08:2b:06:01:03:16:01:05:00:02:01:7b java.lang.Exception: Error 'Authorization error' generated at: 1.3.6.1.3.22.1.5.0 = 123 at org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest$SnmpSubRequest.requestStatusChanged(Snm pRequest.java:617) at org.snmp4j.agent.request.RequestStatus.fireRequestStatusChanged(RequestStatu s.java:89) at org.snmp4j.agent.request.RequestStatus.setErrorStatus(RequestStatus.java:52) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.setAuthorizationError(CommandProcessor.jav a:499) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.processRequest(CommandProcessor.java:378) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.dispatchCommand(CommandProcessor.java:339) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor$Command.run(CommandProcessor.java:559) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.processPdu(CommandProcessor.java:162) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.fireProcessPdu(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:6 64) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.dispatchMessage(MessageDispatcherImpl.java: 297) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.processMessage(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:3 68) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.processMessage(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:3 28) at org.snmp4j.transport.AbstractTransportMapping.fireProcessMessage(AbstractTra nsportMapping.java:76) at org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping$ListenThread.run(DefaultUdpT ransportMapping.java:378) at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) =========================================================== Definition of the "public" and "private" communities are as follows: protected void addCommunities(SnmpCommunityMIB communityMIB) { Variable[] com2sec1 = new Variable[] { new OctetString("public"), new OctetString("cpublic"), // security name getAgent().getContextEngineID(), // local engine ID new OctetString("public"), // default context name new OctetString(), // transport tag new Integer32(StorageType.nonVolatile), // storage type new Integer32(RowStatus.active) // row status }; Variable[] com2sec2 = new Variable[] { new OctetString("private"), new OctetString("cprivate"), // security name getAgent().getContextEngineID(), // local engine ID new OctetString("private"), // default context name new OctetString(), // transport tag new Integer32(StorageType.nonVolatile), // storage type new Integer32(RowStatus.active) // row status }; MOTableRow row2 = communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().createRow(new OctetString("private").toSubIndex(true), com2sec2); MOTableRow row1 = communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().createRow(new OctetString("public").toSubIndex(true), com2sec1); communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().addRow(row2); communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().addRow(row1); } and /** * Adds initial VACM configuration. */ &lt; at &gt;Override protected void addViews(VacmMIB vacm) { vacm.addGroup(SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_SNMPv2c, new OctetString("cpublic"), new OctetString("v1v2group"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addGroup(SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_SNMPv2c, new OctetString("cprivate"), new OctetString("v1v2group"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addAccess(new OctetString("v1v2group"), new OctetString("public"), SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_ANY, SecurityLevel.NOAUTH_NOPRIV, MutableVACM.VACM_MATCH_EXACT, new OctetString("fullReadView"), new OctetString("fullWriteView"), new OctetString("fullNotifyView"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addAccess(new OctetString("v1v2group"), new OctetString("private"), SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_SNMPv2c, SecurityLevel.NOAUTH_NOPRIV, MutableVACM.VACM_MATCH_EXACT, new OctetString("fullReadView"), new OctetString("fullWriteView"), new OctetString("fullNotifyView"), StorageType.nonVolatile); // vacm.addViewTreeFamily(new OctetString("fullReadView"), new OID("1.3"), new OctetString(), VacmMIB.vacmViewIncluded, StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addViewTreeFamily(new OctetString("fullWriteView"), new OID("1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10"), new OctetString(), VacmMIB.vacmViewIncluded, StorageType.nonVolatile); } I think all the areas where changes were needed, were added. The only suspicion that I have is that the default context for all newly created objects may be set to "public" rather than "private" and I have no clue right now where to change it and how to do it. Any suggestions / hints? Thank you in advance Marek </pre> Marek Hajduczenia 2013-04-02T09:13:04 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2211 <pre>Hi, In our management environment, some of the agents operate in push only mechanism where they only send out the SNMPv3 traps to management station and will not respond for any of the SNMPGet's. In this scenario, autodiscovery of EngineID fails hence the management station is doing the following - 1.) Creating the user with the EID of the agent (fixed value that is known to the administrator) new USM(SecurityProtocols.getInstance(),new OctetString(eID), 0); 2.) Adding this to the MPv3 model in addition to it's local EID that was added during initialization. Snmp.getMessageDispatcher().addMessageProcessingModel(new MPv3(usm)); Can someone please help clarify if this is the right approach as though the specification recommends usage of a unique EID, to unblock the reception of traps this is being done. Also, when trying to delete the old EID anytime the user information is modified or deleted, the below code is deleting the MPv3 model altogether. So not using this code leads to only additions of EID's for every single node IP where auto discovery of EID is not possible. Snmp.getMessageDispatcher().removeMessageProcessingModel(new MPv3(eID.getBytes())); Kindly clarify the right approach for this use case. Thank you. Regards </pre> Ganesh, Lakshmi Prabha 2013-04-02T08:47:09 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2203 <pre>Dear colleagues, Following the online tutorials and the structure of the BaseAgent.java class, I am trying to add read and write community definitions into my project. I am extending the BaseAgent.java class, and I have done the following changes to the following extensions: [1] changes in method protected void addCommunities(SnmpCommunityMIB communityMIB) Variable[] com2sec1 = new Variable[] { new OctetString("public"), new OctetString("cpublic"), // security name getAgent().getContextEngineID(), // local engine ID new OctetString("public"), // default context name new OctetString(), // transport tag new Integer32(StorageType.nonVolatile), // storage type new Integer32(RowStatus.active) // row status }; Variable[] com2sec2 = new Variable[] { new OctetString("private"), new OctetString("cprivate"), // security name getAgent().getContextEngineID(), // local engine ID new OctetString("private"), // default context name new OctetString(), // transport tag new Integer32(StorageType.nonVolatile), // storage type new Integer32(RowStatus.active) // row status }; MOTableRow row2 = communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().createRow(new OctetString("private").toSubIndex(true), com2sec2); MOTableRow row1 = communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().createRow(new OctetString("public").toSubIndex(true), com2sec1); communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().addRow(row2); communityMIB.getSnmpCommunityEntry().addRow(row1); if I understand the code correctly, I am adding here information about two communities, one with the name "public" and another with the name "private" (names will be changed later on, after testing is done). The respectove entries ae added into the communityMIB. [2] changes in the method protected void addViews(VacmMIB vacm) { vacm.addGroup(SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_SNMPv2c, new OctetString("cpublic"), new OctetString("v1v2group"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addGroup(SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_SNMPv2c, new OctetString("cprivate"), new OctetString("v1v2group"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addAccess(new OctetString("v1v2group"), new OctetString("public"), SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_ANY, SecurityLevel.NOAUTH_NOPRIV, MutableVACM.VACM_MATCH_EXACT, new OctetString("fullReadView"), new OctetString("fullWriteView"), new OctetString("fullNotifyView"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addAccess(new OctetString("v1v2group"), new OctetString("private"), SecurityModel.SECURITY_MODEL_SNMPv2c, SecurityLevel.NOAUTH_NOPRIV, MutableVACM.VACM_MATCH_EXACT, new OctetString("fullReadView"), new OctetString("fullWriteView"), new OctetString("fullNotifyView"), StorageType.nonVolatile); vacm.addViewTreeFamily(new OctetString("fullReadView"), new OID("1.3"), new OctetString(), VacmMIB.vacmViewIncluded, StorageType.nonVolatile); } where I only replicated the entries for public community already in place before for the private community. I did not replicate the vacm.addViewTreeFamily entry though, since I cannot really figure out how it is connected to communities. I would appreciate any pointers to what else needs to be done to make sure that some of the managed objects I am adding in the programe can be actually set? Right now, every time I try to set an object at OID 1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1 (defined with MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ_WRITE), I get the following debug sequence and the following Euthorization Error. I can clearly see that the "private" community was found correctly in the definitions, and that the requests are created correctly, but for some reason the processing stops and error is thrown out. 27709 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping - Received message from localhost/127.0.0.1/60096 with length 45: 30:2b:02:01:01:04:07:70:72:69:76:61:74:65:a3:1d:02:04:51:b3:d9:86:02:01:00:0 2:01:00:30:0f:30:0d:06:08:2b:06:01:03:16:02:0a:01:02:01:01 27709 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.Snmp - Fire process PDU event: CommandResponderEvent[securityModel=2, securityLevel=1, maxSizeResponsePDU=65535, pduHandle=PduHandle[1370741126], stateReference=StateReference[msgID=0,pduHandle=PduHandle[1370741126],securi tyEngineID=null,securityModel=null,securityName=private,securityLevel=1,cont extEngineID=null,contextName=null,retryMsgIDs=null], pdu=SET[requestID=1370741126, errorStatus=Success(0), errorIndex=0, VBS[1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1 = 1]], messageProcessingModel=1, securityName=private, processed=false, peerAddress=127.0.0.1/60096, transportMapping=org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping&lt; at &gt;b50daf, tmStateReference=null] 27710 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.SnmpCommunityMIB - Looking up coexistence info for 'private' 27710 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.SnmpCommunityMIB - Found coexistence info for 'private'=CoexistenceInfo[securityName=cprivate,contextEngineID=80:00:13:70: 01:c0:a8:01:04,contextName=private,transportTag=] 27710 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.SnmpCommunityMIB - Address 127.0.0.1/60096 passes filter, because source address filtering is disabled 27710 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest - Created subrequest 0 with scope org.snmp4j.agent.DefaultMOContextScope[context=private,lowerBound=1.3.6.1.3. 22.2.10.1,lowerIncluded=true,upperBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1,upperIncluded=tr ue] from 1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1 = 1 27710 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest - SnmpSubRequests initialized: [org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest$SnmpSubRequest[scope=org.snmp4j.agent. DefaultMOContextScope[context=private,lowerBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1,lowerIn cluded=true,upperBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1,upperIncluded=true],vb=1.3.6.1.3. 22.2.10.1 = 1,status=org.snmp4j.agent.request.RequestStatus&lt; at &gt;1e820764,query=null,index=0, targetMO=null]] 27715 [DefaultUDPTransportMapping_127.0.0.1/2002] DEBUG org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping - Sending message to 127.0.0.1/60096 with length 45: 30:2b:02:01:01:04:07:70:72:69:76:61:74:65:a2:1d:02:04:51:b3:d9:86:02:01:10:0 2:01:01:30:0f:30:0d:06:08:2b:06:01:03:16:02:0a:01:02:01:01 java.lang.Exception: Error 'Authorization error' generated at: 1.3.6.1.3.22.2.10.1 = 1 at org.snmp4j.agent.request.SnmpRequest$SnmpSubRequest.requestStatusChanged(Snm pRequest.java:617) at org.snmp4j.agent.request.RequestStatus.fireRequestStatusChanged(RequestStatu s.java:89) at org.snmp4j.agent.request.RequestStatus.setErrorStatus(RequestStatus.java:52) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.setAuthorizationError(CommandProcessor.jav a:499) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.processRequest(CommandProcessor.java:378) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.dispatchCommand(CommandProcessor.java:339) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor$Command.run(CommandProcessor.java:559) at org.snmp4j.agent.CommandProcessor.processPdu(CommandProcessor.java:162) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.fireProcessPdu(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:6 64) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.dispatchMessage(MessageDispatcherImpl.java: 297) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.processMessage(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:3 68) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.processMessage(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:3 28) at org.snmp4j.transport.AbstractTransportMapping.fireProcessMessage(AbstractTra nsportMapping.java:76) at org.snmp4j.transport.DefaultUdpTransportMapping$ListenThread.run(DefaultUdpT ransportMapping.java:378) at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) Thank you in advance Marek </pre> Marek Hajduczenia 2013-03-31T09:46:43 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2200 <pre>Dear colleagues, I am continuing the development of my project and now I have a rather simple task that keeps on generating errors for some reason I do not quite understand. But let me first describe what I am doing and what the output is: [1] I create 4 individual OID to be used later on OID oidLocalHostName = new OID(".1.3.6.1.3.22.1.1"); // nomeServidor OID oidRootFolder = new OID(".1.3.6.1.3.22.1.2"); // diretoriaBase OID oidDefaultPlayer = new OID(".1.3.6.1.3.22.1.3"); // musicPlayer OID oidNumberOfMusicFiles = new OID(".1.3.6.1.3.22.1.4"); // nTotalmMsicasDisp [2] then I try to register individual new managed objects as follows server.registerManagedObject(MOCreator.createReadOnly(oidLocalHostName, java.net.InetAddress.getLocalHost().getHostName())); server.registerManagedObject(MOCreator.createReadOnly(oidDefaultPlayer, "VLC")); // HERE IS THE LINE WITH ERROR server.registerManagedObject(MOCreator.createReadOnly(oidRootFolder, folder.getAbsolutePath())); server.registerManagedObject(MOCreator.createReadOnly(oidNumberOfMusicFiles, 0)); the function registerManagedObject is just a simple wrapper defined as follows: public void registerManagedObject(ManagedObject mo) { try { server.register(mo, null); } catch (DuplicateRegistrationException ex) { throw new RuntimeException(ex); } } I get however the following error on console: 208 [main] INFO org.snmp4j.agent.DefaultMOServer - Registered MO org.snmp4j.agent.mo.MOScalar[oid=1.3.6.1.3.22.1.1,access=org.snmp4j.agent.mo .MOAccessImpl&lt; at &gt;3ce3e8f3,value=Marek-HP,volatile=false] in default context with scope org.snmp4j.agent.mo.MOScalar[oid=1.3.6.1.3.22.1.1,access=org.snmp4j.agent.mo .MOAccessImpl&lt; at &gt;3ce3e8f3,value=Marek-HP,volatile=false] Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: org.snmp4j.agent.DuplicateRegistrationException: org.snmp4j.agent.DefaultMOContextScope[context=null,lowerBound=1.3.6.1.3.22. 1,lowerIncluded=true,upperBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.2,upperIncluded=false] at org.snmpagent.snmpAgentServer.registerManagedObject(snmpAgentServer.java:177 ) at org.snmpagent.snmpAgentClientMain.main(snmpAgentClientMain.java:160) Caused by: org.snmp4j.agent.DuplicateRegistrationException: org.snmp4j.agent.DefaultMOContextScope[context=null,lowerBound=1.3.6.1.3.22. 1,lowerIncluded=true,upperBound=1.3.6.1.3.22.2,upperIncluded=false] at org.snmp4j.agent.DefaultMOServer.register(DefaultMOServer.java:279) at org.snmpagent.snmpAgentServer.registerManagedObject(snmpAgentServer.java:173 ) ... 1 more With the information that the content was registered at OID of 1.3.6.1.3.22.1.1 (oidLocalHostName) with the default context (null). The attempt to perform registration for OID of 1.3.6.1.3.22.2 causes the org.snmp4j.agent.DuplicateRegistrationException for some reason. I looked through the documentation associated with this error, but cannot still locate what the problem is. Any hints? Also, is there a better / cleaner way to create a number of OIDs with specific values? I looked through the examples in the SampleAgent class, but there is no clear example of how that could be done. Thanks for any help Marek </pre> Marek Hajduczenia 2013-03-30T13:35:21 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2198 <pre>I send SNMP reqest to HP LaserJet 3005 with MIB "usage-printer-total-charge" (1.3.6.1.4.1.11.2.3.9.4.2.1.1.16.1.2.0) and get the following response: ====================== 1.3.6.1.4.1.11.2.3.9.4.2.1.1.16.1.2.0 = 47:9b:54:00 ====================== Printer WEB interface shows me total count of printed pages = 79528. Can anybody tell me how 47:9b:54:00 corresponds with 79528 ? I tried any binary representations, forward and backward. I tried ASCII codes. But I cannot find any connection! </pre> Константин Лохтин 2013-03-30T13:08:29 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2197 <pre>Hi, SNMP4J 2.2.0 and SNMP4-SMI 1.0 have been released and are available for download from http://www.snmp4j.org/html/download.html The new SNMP4J-SMI provides MIB support for any SNMP4J application without the need of changing existing code. Adding a few lines of code is all you need to do. For more details see: http://www.snmp4j.org/smi/doc/com/snmp4j/smi/package-summary.html With SNMP4J-SMI, you can compile MIB modules at runtime into your application and OID values are displayed as object names, SMI variables can be parsed from their DISPLAY-HINT representation or enumeration value for example. SNMP4J 2.2.0 contains several enhancements but also a major bugfix regarding the processing of SNMPv3 reports. To ensure higher security and compatibility with RFC 3412 and 3414, reports will be sent back to the command generator with the same security level as the command was received, except for a few exceptions described in the RFCs. By configuration the behavior of SNMP4J &lt; 2.2.0 can be restored and also a strategy can be chosen, that does not accept noAuthNoPriv reports at all as command generator. See http://www.snmp4j.org/doc/org/snmp4j/SNMP4JSettings.ReportSecurityLevelStrategy.html SNMP4J 2.2.0 can be used in conjunction of SNMP4J-Agent 2.0.7, SNMP4J-AgentX 2.1.0, and SNMP4J-JMX 2.0.0. SNMP4J 2.2.0 CHANGES ===================== * Added: Option in SNMP4Settings to allow parsing Counter64 variables in SNMPv1 PDUs which is not allowed by SNMPv1 but a common bug in many devices. * Fixed [SFJ-69]: For the following report PDUs the securityLevel now is set to the same as in the request (which is in SNMP4J 2.1 and prior not the case): RFC3414 §3.2.3 Unkown engine ID. RFC3414 §3.2.4 Unknown security name RFC3414 §3.2.5 Unsupported security level RFC3414 §3.2.6 Wrong digest -&gt; authentication failure The prior 2.2 behavior can be reactivated using SNMP4JSettings.setReportSecurityLevelStrategy(..). * Fixed Javadoc title tag. * Improved: Logging of USM time exceptions. * Fixed: Race condition in DummyTransport. * Added: New Constructor in VariableBinding to directly create a VB by parsing OID and variable from a string in conjunction with SNMP4J-SMI. * Improved SMI formatting. * Fixed issue in TreeUtils in conjunction with SNMPv1, the end event was not properly called back. * Updated repository URLs in pom.xml. * Added: setSecurityModel and setSecurityLevel in Target interface. * Added: OIDTextFormat usage in OID class. * Added: contextEngineID support in SnmpURI and DefaultPDUFactory. * Fixed [SFJ-66]: Fixed lexicographic ordering check in TreeUtils for multiple root OIDs. * Improved: TimeTicks setValue from String and extended PDUFactory by GETBULK parameter handling. * Improved: TLS JavaDoc. * Added: Default target in SnmpURI. Frank Fock </pre> Frank Fock 2013-03-27T22:41:25 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2193 <pre>Hi, I just tried to use v2.1.0 from Maven and received checksum errors for the JAR file: [WARNING] Checksum validation failed, expected 10e37bdf61fd8f870d36570c4086352762963f86 but is 60c86ea9e41d4c46d5c035470f4fee89c5f7f20e for http://artifactory/artifactory/libs-release/org/snmp4j/snmp4j/2.1.0/snmp4j-2.1.0.jar [WARNING] Checksum validation failed, expected 10e37bdf61fd8f870d36570c4086352762963f86 but is 60c86ea9e41d4c46d5c035470f4fee89c5f7f20e for http://artifactory/artifactory/libs-release/org/snmp4j/snmp4j/2.1.0/snmp4j-2.1.0.jar (Note: this is a WARNING because I've told my Artifactory to ignore checksum errors for https://oosnmp.net/dist/release) According to an old mailing list entry (http://lists.agentpp.org/pipermail/snmp4j/2012-March/004801.html) this issue was present in v2.0.3 and should be resolved "with the next version". Has anyone else experienced this issue with v2.1.0? Kind regards, Duncan Jones CISSP Advanced Solutions Group Manager Thales Jupiter House, Station Road, Cambridge, CB1 2JD www.thalesgroup.com/iss Tel: +44 (0)1223 723623. Mob: +44 (0)7766 076631 e-mail: Duncan.Jones-vn+3mORIPc+ju1H+chf1WFaTQe2KTcn/&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org Consider the environment before printing this mail. Thales e-Security Limited is incorporated in England and Wales with company registration number 2518805. Its registered office is located at 2 Dashwood Lang Road, The Bourne Business Park, Addlestone, Nr. Weybridge, Surrey KT15 2NX. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential. It may also be privileged. It is intended only for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by any other person is unauthorised. If you are not an addressee or the intended addressee, you must not disclose, copy, circulate or in any other way use or rely on the information contained in this e-mail. Such unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform us immediately on +44 (0)1223 723600 and delete it and all copies from your system. Commercial matters detailed or referred to in this e-mail are subject to a written contract signed for and on behalf of Thales e-Security Limited. </pre> Duncan Jones 2013-03-12T16:07:35 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2192 <pre> Hello, I have a confusion I'd like to clear up about localization. So, if I understand correctly, these should be the results when adding a user according to different function signatures: usm.addUser(user.getSecurityName(), usm.getLocalEngineID(), user); &lt;-- User is localized (password + engine + algorithm = key) usm.addUser(user.getSecurityName(), null, user) &lt;-- Not localized ? (password + algorithm = key) usm.addUser(user.getSecurityName(), user) &lt;-- Not localized ? (password + algorithm = key) .... However, I'm confused, because I have tried to add the user in all these ways, but I never have to change this command: "snmpget -v 3 -u MYUSER -l authPriv -a SHA -A MYUSERAuthPassword -x DES -X MYUSERPrivPassword localhost:1161 .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.1.0" The command ALWAYS works. I would think that I should need to change some parameter or something to indicate that I'm using a localized key or non-localized key, but I don't. Is there some logic going on behind the scenes on the manager side or SNMP4j side to make this work somehow? Thanks </pre> m k 2013-03-12T01:53:20 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2180 <pre> Hello, I'm trying to figure out notification filtering, and only having a bit of success. I managed to set up a notification profile that is checked, but it turns out that no matter what I do, ALL notifications are blocked. In this example, I'm trying to ALLOW the coldstart notification to notify--and its not working. I'd really appreciate some help. Thanks ..... The following is the code, but this might look mangled on the mailing list, so I'm including a pastebin, too. http://pastebin.com/ti0efAMv Code: /* Works. Creates filter profile */ notificationMIB.getNotifyFilterProfileTable().addRow( notificationMIB.getNotifyFilterProfileTable().createRow( new OctetString("v2c").toSubIndex(true), // true - implied length new Variable[]{ new OctetString("onlyDefault"), new Integer32(StorageType.permanent), new Integer32(RowStatus.active)})); /* Fails. Matches nothing, blocks everything */ notificationMIB.getNotifyFilterTable().addRow( notificationMIB.getNotifyFilterTable().createRow( // false - Not implied length true - Implied length new OctetString("onlyDefault").toSubIndex(false).append(new OID(new int[]{1,3,6}).toSubIndex(true)), new Variable[]{ new OID(new int[]{1,3,6}), new OctetString(), new Integer32(1), // Included new Integer32(StorageType.permanent), new Integer32(RowStatus.active)})); 109 [LexBeanRunInterruptable(LexLocalHostBean):Thread-15] INFO org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.NotificationOriginatorImpl - Notification 1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.1 reported with [] for context 109 [LexBeanRunInterruptable(LexLocalHostBean):Thread-15] INFO org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.NotificationOriginatorImpl - Notification 1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.1 did not pass filter 118.50.99 109 [LexBeanRunInterruptable(LexLocalHostBean):Thread-15] WARN org.snmp4j.agent.mo.snmp.NotificationOriginatorImpl - Access denied by VACM for 1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.1 </pre> m k 2013-03-06T15:20:59 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2168 <pre>Hi, i'm having a method that should add actions to the MIB, and I also add the OID's to the ACTION_OIDS array. here's some code: Object[][] ret = new Object[mappings.length][3]; for (int cnt = 0; cnt &lt; mappings.length; cnt++) { ret[cnt][0] = mappings[cnt].getOid(dynIndex); MBeanStateInfo[] states = new MBeanStateInfo[] { new MBeanStateInfo(2, null, null) }; ret[cnt][1] = states; MBeanActionInfo[] actions = new MBeanActionInfo[] { new MBeanActionInfo( mappings[cnt].getActionDef().getActionId(), mappings[cnt].getActionDef().getMemberName(), new Object[0] ) }; ret[cnt][2] = actions; } scalarSupportActions.addAll(new ObjectName(name), ret); consider that the OID is correct (everytime an action is found I print the OID) and unique, also the ActionId is different for each action. A MOScalar is also registered at the server. I can call one method (the one method I created long time ago), but none of the new methods I just created today. Can you think of anything why the behaviour is like this? access is always read and write, variables are always the same, and the method signatures are also the same (except some variation in the method name of course, but the mapping is correct). Thanks for hints, that's really confusing. BR david </pre> david pocivalnik 2013-03-04T15:50:17 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2166 <pre>Hi, I'm using the following code to create the target address. Address targetAddress = GenericAddress.parse("udp:&lt;HostName&gt;:&lt;TrapReceiverPort&gt;/162"); This goes through fine when I use the snmp4j1.0.jar. However, this particular version seems does not support the IPv6 addresses. For IPv6 requests it throws the java.nio.BufferOverFlowException. java.nio.BufferOverflowException at java.nio.Buffer.nextPutIndex(Unknown Source) at java.nio.HeapByteBuffer.put(Unknown Source) at org.snmp4j.asn1.BEROutputStream.write(BEROutputStream.java:65) at org.snmp4j.asn1.BER.encodeOID(BER.java:437) at org.snmp4j.smi.OID.encodeBER(OID.java:205) at org.snmp4j.smi.VariableBinding.encodeBER(VariableBinding.java:176) at org.snmp4j.PDUv1.encodeBER(PDUv1.java:207) at org.snmp4j.mp.MPv1.prepareOutgoingMessage(MPv1.java:108) at org.snmp4j.MessageDispatcherImpl.sendPdu(MessageDispatcherImpl.java:376) at org.snmp4j.Snmp.sendMessage(Snmp.java:900) at org.snmp4j.Snmp.send(Snmp.java:779) at org.snmp4j.Snmp.send(Snmp.java:771) To fix the above issue, I picked up the latest jars snmp4j2.1.0.jar, snmp4j1.11.3.jar, and snmp4j1.10.jar. All of these throw the unknown host exception. What I notice is that snm4j sends hostname as "hostname:trapreceiverport" to underneath java api to resolve the address, hence the issue unknownhostexception. The same code works with 1.0 version of jar. Are there any difference from now and then? Any help is very much appreciated. Thanks, Parash </pre> Hallur,Parashuram 2013-03-04T11:24:05 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2164 <pre>Hi, I've defined a method call that doesn't take any arguments successfully. Now I defined the following method void startExport(String s); and created the MOScalar as the one w/o any arguments expCall = moFactory.createScalar(oidExpCall, moFactory.createAccess(MOAccessImpl.ACCESSIBLE_FOR_READ_WRITE), new Integer32()); and registered it. in the *Inst.java class I added the OID to the ACTION_OIDS and created the following array: private static final Object[][] SCALAR_MBEANS_EXP_ACTIONS = { { TestManagementMib.oidExpCall, new MBeanStateInfo[] { new MBeanStateInfo(2, null, null) }, new MBeanActionInfo[] { new MBeanActionInfo(4, "startExport", new Object[1]) } } }; I figured the first parameter in the new MBeanActionInfo can't be the same as the one used previously (which was 3), thus I increased it. Also, I though the integer in the Object[] defines the number of arguments that the method takes, thus i set it to one. finally I added SCALAR_MBEANS_EXP_ACTIONS to scalarSupportActions. Something must be wrong, as the Agent isn't starting. The following error: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError when I set the number of arguments to 0 (Object[0]) then the agent starts successfully, but i can't pass along any argument, e.g. $ snmpget someOID s myStringToPass Thanks for any hints and BR david </pre> david pocivalnik 2013-02-28T08:31:22 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2153 <pre>Dear all, I am writing a small SNMP related project for my course. The task is to create an SNMP agent that will monitor a local selected folder and list all files stored in this folder in a MIB. I have already MIB designed, agent working fine on the initial pass, i.e., it creates a MIB table, populates initial values (files found at first pass through the folder) and then registers MIB with the agent. The code snippet building the table structure is shown below: MOTableBuilder builder = new MOTableBuilder(oidNewRoot); // MIB structure builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_INTEGER32,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ _ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_OCTET_STRING,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_R EAD_ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_INTEGER,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ_O NLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_OCTET_STRING,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_R EAD_ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_INTEGER32,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ _ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_INTEGER32,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ _ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_OCTET_STRING,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_R EAD_ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_OCTET_STRING,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_R EAD_ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_INTEGER32,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ _ONLY); builder.addColumnType(SMIConstants.SYNTAX_INTEGER,MOAccessImpl.ACCESS_READ_W RITE); The code snippet adding a row is shown below (it is repeated in a loop to add all found files): builder.addRowValue(new Integer32(index)); index++; builder.addRowValue(new OctetString(fileName.getName())); builder.addRowValue(new Integer32(3)); builder.addRowValue(new OctetString(fileName.getPath())); builder.addRowValue(new Integer32((int)fileName.length())); builder.addRowValue(new Integer32(323)); builder.addRowValue(new OctetString("Artista")); builder.addRowValue(new OctetString("Album")); builder.addRowValue(new Integer32(1980)); builder.addRowValue(new Integer32(4)); Finally, I register the new MIB with the agent: server.registerManagedObject(builder.build()); After that, I run agent on a loop, every 5 seconds checking whether a new file was added to the folder. When that happens, I can detect a new file added and create list of such files. However, I do not know (could not find any information) on how to add row to already registered MIB. One thought was on reusing previously constructed table and just deregister it, then add new rows as needed and the register again but it seems like a very crude solution to me. Is there any way to do that better? if so, I would appreciate any pointers. Thank you in advance Marek </pre> Marek Hajduczenia 2013-02-26T16:17:40 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2152 <pre> Hello, I'm having an issue. Starting with neither file existing in my project folder, I run TestAgent.java, perform a set on the sysLocation (successfully), but upon shutting down and restarting the agent, the value is gone. I noticed that the configuration file that (as I understand it) holds the persistence data was never created. The bootcounter file was created, however, so it doesn't seem like a matter of permissions. I did this on a windows box, and what I found really funny is that I tried it at home on my linux box and it worked just fine. I used Netbeans both times. I temporarily ran my IDE as an administrator on linux because it didn't like my binding to a low port, but I also tried to run as admin on the windows box just to be sure--with no success. I'm wondering if there is anything obvious that I'm missing, or any suggested sanity-check I might do? </pre> m k 2013-02-26T14:43:30 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2149 <pre> The AGENT++/SNMP4J mailing lists have been moved successfully to a new server (new IP but same DNS "agentpp.org") and all the lists are online again. You may now continue to send messages and ask your valuable questions and comments! CHANGES: * To avoid relaying unwanted email message through the mailman bounce processing, emails from non-members will be discarded instead of rejected. * The mailman list admin pages are exclusively accessible through HTTPs using the oosnmp.net domain name. Existing links will be automatically redirected, so you do not need to update your bookmarks. Best regards, Frank Fock </pre> Frank Fock 2013-02-24T20:21:34 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.snmp4j.general/2148 <pre> The AGENT++/SNMP4J mailing list will be offline from today 12:00 MET until Monday 25.2.2013 10:00 MET. You will receive a message from the mailing lists you have subscribed to when the lists are online again. Please do not send messages to the lists while the lists are down, because those messages might get lost during maintenance. Thank you very much for your cooperation and understanding! Best regards, Frank Fock </pre> Frank Fock 2013-02-22T09:29:15 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.network.snmp4j.general