RE: access control
"Mike Ayers" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.net-snmp.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <83E753BE7B6A324ABB336245BAF1DAAC07FDA171@mailserver.metatv-ds.metatv.com> |
> From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Masoud Fatollahy > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 8:24 AM > com2sec cust1_sec 192.168.55.0/24 public > com2sec cust2_sec 192.168.56.0/24 public Note that the community "public" will now have acces to both cust1_sec rights and cust2_sec rights, so customers 1 and 2 can see each other's data. Probably not what you want if you went to the trouble to specify them individually. > view all included .1 If myuser is not the system administrator, then you should at least remove the VACM, USM, and coexistence MIBs from the view. > view cust1_v included .1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.1.1 ff.a0 I'd suggest not writing no-effect masks. That's just a maintenance hazard. The line: view cust1_v included .1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.1.1 ...would have the same effect. > Do i missing something? Looks good. Note, however, that the only things viewable in non-default contexts are those MIBs you explicitly register to present data in those contexts. MIB-II, IF-MIB, etc. are only available in the default context. HTH, Mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ 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