Re: public accessible snmp devices?

["Alexei Roudnev" <alex () relcom net>]

It's OK to see any garbage in SNMP; I never got surprised (as I was not
surprised when I killed firewall by snmpwalk).
No one (in reality) makes good QA on SNMP functions (on routers or
switches).

I already have a few sanity checks in 'snmpstat', may be I should add one
more (ignore answers with 0 counters).


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Petri Helenius" <pete () he iki fi>
To: "Jim Popovitch" <jimpop () yahoo com>
Cc: "Alexei Roudnev" <alex () relcom net>; <vickyr () socal rr com>;
<nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: public accessible snmp devices?


> Jim Popovitch wrote:
>
> > I think this could be relevant.  a LOT of devices drop snmp requests
> > when they get busy or when too many incoming requests occur.  Are you
> > sure that you were the only one polling that device?  Perhaps someone
> > else put it into a "busy" state.  Too often with SNMP devices and tools
> > a '0' can mean things other than zero.
> So you are saying that it's ok for a Cisco or Juniper router to return
> zero for a counter when they feel "busy" ?
>
> My RFC collection tells a different story.
>
> Pete