nv-l

RE: [nv-l] Authentication Failure Trap Argument interpretation

2003-10-23 13:33:12
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Authentication Failure Trap Argument interpretation
From: "Treptow, Craig" <Treptow.Craig AT principal DOT com>
To: <nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 12:21:07 -0500
So this implies that sniffer, ethereal, and Netview have not been updated to 
handle this new way of sending an IP address?  If so, then I guess it's time to 
see the release notes for 7.1.4 to see if something like this has been 
addressed.


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joe Fernandez [mailto:jfernand AT kardinia DOT com]
>Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 9:30 AM
>To: nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com
>Subject: Re: [nv-l] Authentication Failure Trap Argument interpretation
>
>
>James,
>
>The two objects that Craig lists are from the Cisco System MIB.
>
>1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.131.1.5.2.0 = csySnmpAuthFailAddressType
>Syntax=netAddressType
>
>1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.131.1.5.3.0 = csySnmpAuthFailAddress
>Syntax=InetAddress
>
>The MIB imports these Textual Conventions from INET-ADDRESS-MIB
>
>If I read INET-ADDRESS-MIB correctly, the IETF is telling MIB 
>designers to
>stop
>using the old IpAddress syntax because it does not cater for 
>IPv6, and start
>using these Textual Conventions to allow for both IP v4 and v6. 
>
>And the way to use them is to have two objects, the first 
>defining the type of
>address (v4,v6,..), the second with the actual address.
>The first value below is 1 which is the enumeration for IPv4 if
>Syntax=netAddressType.
>The syntax of InetAddress is defined as just Octet String, so 
>that is why
>it is
>encoded that way.
>