Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
My SNMP troubles solved. Was Re: (ASCEND) Is this a correct strategy to utilise Ascend enterprise SNMP extensions?
No one replied to my posting concerning a problem about
using enterprise SNMP extensions. This supports my
impression that SNMP usage is not widely practiced,
or understood. Still I soldiered on and am now posting
what I would have liked to have seen in a response
(that is a menu type appraoch).
First I upgraded our MAX operating system from 4.6C
to 6.0.2. Might as well use the latest and greatest.
I found the UCD SNMP source code distribution particularly
useful in understanding what I had, been indeed, doing
'wrong', with regard to using extensions.
What follows is a menu approach that can be adapted to
implement automated script processing of snmp read and
write commands (such as with shell or perl).
Interesting that the approach drops a hint about the
cold war origins of core Internet technologies (the
.dod. part of the OID, referring to US Department of
Defence).
By the way, if you see 152 as disconnect causes in
your radius log files and you are NOT isssuing snmp
hangups, you know someone knows the name of your MAX
box's write community who shouldn't!
Using the current UCD SNMP distribution compiled from
source, with defaults, on a UNIX type machine
(I used a Linux box), dump an entire set of Ascend
MIB files to /usr/local/share/snmp/mibs. Remove
rfc1213.mib from /usr/local/share/snmp/mibs
(it is a duplicate).
The follwing dumps session branch information to file dump:
export MIBS=ALL
snmpwalk max.myisp.com readpw .iso.org.dod.internet.private.enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup>dump
*********
The following extracts session information about a connected user:
grep 23 dump
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusIndex.23 = 23
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusValidFlag.23 = valid(2)
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusUserName.23 = "username"
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusUserIPAddress.23 = IpAddress: 203.29.35.62
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusUserSubnetMask.23 = IpAddress: 255.255.255.255
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusCurrentService.23 = ppp(3)
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusCallReferenceNum.23 = 263824661
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionActiveTable.sessionActiveEntry.ssnActiveIndex.263824661 = 23
enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionActiveTable.sessionActiveEntry.ssnActiveUserIPAddress.263824962 = IpAddress: 203.29.35.23
*********
The following hangs the user up:
export MIBS=ALL
snmpset max.myisp.com writepw .iso.org.dod.internet.private.enterprises.ascend.sessionStatusGroup.sessionStatusTable.sessionStatusEntry.ssnStatusValidFlag.23 i 1
Very simple when you how! SNMP, might I say in contrast to your myriad
abusers, I love you!
John
--
John Heenan
Systems Engineer ATI/Firstnet
webmaster@atinet.com.au
http://www.atinet.com.au/webmaster.htm
John Heenan wrote:
>
> I am sorry if this is not considered the correct place to make this
> posting. Getting ones first exposure to enterprise SNMP on a MAX box is
> hardly ideal, given the sparseness of relevant documentation.
>
> I am trying to access SNMP Ascend enterprise extensions on our MAX
> 4000E, particularly session extensions.
>
> An 'snmpwalk' walk on our MAX produces many ASN numbers without
> equivalent MIB OID names.
>
> I tried using the complete ascend.mib from maxutils, this made no
> difference. I tried simply adding in the current Ascend ascend.mib and
> session.mib to a default MIB, hoping to see OIDs containing the string
> 'sessionStatusGroup'. No luck.
>
> Either I an doing this incorrectly or the operating system version on
> our MAX does not support supplying this information.
>
> The operating system is version 4.6C. If I upgraded to 5.0Ai28 or 6.0.2
> would this fix the problem? I know an upgrade is well advised anyway.
>
> This brings me to other question. Is it safer to stay with 5.0Ai28 (or
> another version) than with 6.0.2? If 6.0.2 is advised, is the following
> upgrade path safe: 4.6C to 5.0A to 6.02?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> John
> --
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups:
References: