Re: Master-agent vs. Sub-agent vs. pluggable object

I have written some of the functionality, compiled as part of the master
agent, and tried to access the new parameters. Well, it doesn't work.. 

I am aware that the code is included in the agent library (checked with
nm that libnetsnmpmibs has the relevant functions). However, when I run
snmpd, I see that the relevant init_xxx functions are not called.  Am I
missing something in the snmpd.conf? Any other ideas?

Alon


On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 09:40 +0300, Alon Marx wrote: 
> Thanks for the advice. I'll start with the master agent approach. 
> Lots of work ahead :)
> 
> On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 16:10 +0100, Dave Shield wrote:
> > On 17/07/06, Alon Marx <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I have a MIB file with the relevant parameters and I more or less
> > > figured out how to use mib2c and complete the relevant code. Now I'm
> > > trying to figure out what's the best way to use these files:
> > > 1. compile as part of the master agent
> > > 2. compile as subagent
> > > 3. compile as pluggable shared objects
> > >
> > > The documentation gives all options, but I'm asking for recommendations
> > > which one is the best in my case.
> > 
> > It's difficult to answer that question.
> > In many ways, it doesn't really matter - things will look exactly the
> > same from outside, whichever choice (or choices) you make.
> > 
> > The main question is whether to run as one (or more) separate
> > subagents, or as part of the master agent.  (Note that 1 and 3 are
> > more-or-less equivalent - they're just different ways of achieving
> > the same basic architecture).
> > 
> > How clean an interface is there for retrieving the necessary information?
> > (and actively controlling the device, if appropriate).   If there's a clean
> > API, then any of the three mechanisms would work equally well.
> > If the data is held within some separate server process, device driver,
> > etc - with no clean way to get at it from outside - then using the subagent
> > approach might be the simplest way.
> > 
> > 
> > > One consideration I have: I would like to have all parameters integrated
> > > into a common "object" (for example, build all parameters into a single
> > > sub-agent). Which option supports this (if any)?
> > 
> > Any of them.
> > Remember that a single MIB module implementation can typically be used
> > with all three approaches, without needing to change a line of code.  The
> > agent-MIB API is standardised - it's just how that code is compiled and
> > linked into the agent framework that differs.
> > 
> > So you could develop the code as part of a single standalone master agent
> > (which is probably the simplest for debugging problems), then just recompile
> > it to act as a subagent or a plugin module - you wouldn't have to change the
> > code at all.
> > 
> > Dave
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Net-snmp-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
[email protected]
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users