[SNMP4J] Two Snmp, one TransportMapping cause IOException

[Frank Fock]

Hi Robert,

To implement the requirements listed below
you can either use

(1) a single Snmp instance with a single
transport mapping or
(2) two Snmp instances with two transport
mappings.

(1) uses less resources but can be tricky
to configure, because you need localized
keys for users with the same name but
different passphrases (a priory engine ID
discovery needed).

(2) is easy to setup and use, if you use
two different USM instances.

See also
https://server.oosnmp.net/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=1441800

Regards,
Frank

Robert Mycek wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> - I must use UDP transport
> - I must bind socket to specific localAddress:port (requirement, can`t
> change it).
> - I must do snmp set to different client and it must be v3, authPriv
> and user: "snmpUser"
> but each set may have different auth/privPasswords.
> - Two or more simultaneously snmp set to the same remoteAddress:port
> with different auth/priv passwords are possible.
> - Remote engineId is unknown (have to be discovered).
> 
> QUESTION:
> Is it possible to do it with one instance of Snmp (with one TransportMapping)?
> 
> RM
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Frank Fock <fock at agentpp.com> wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> This is not an error in the code. If you use a transport
>> mapping with two Snmp instances (thus also two MessageDispatchers)
>> then you get a problem with processing a response with
>> the right MessageDispatcher instance.
>>
>> Like
>> https://server.oosnmp.net/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=1441794
>> suggest, you will need to implement your own MessageDispatcher
>> to avoid redundant processing.
>>
>> Why are you using two Snmp instances at all?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Frank

-- 
AGENT++
http://www.agentpp.com
http://www.snmp4j.com
http://www.mibexplorer.com
http://www.mibdesigner.com