From: Sean C (Upp_and_Upp@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun May 22 2005 - 11:22:00 GMT-3
Hi Simon,
Again, good catch (along with the bc and be question). I've now been
investigating this and I've found something contradictory, but I want to make
sure I'm on the same track.
From what I'm reading on the CD, it appears that when the command 'snmp-server
enable traps SNMP' is configured, not only 'snmp-server enable traps' then a
few types of snmp traps are enabled globally.
Per the CD:
Router(config)# snmp-server enable traps snmp - When used without any of the
optional keywords, enables authenticationFailure, linkUp, linkDown, warmStart,
and coldStart traps.
Note that linkUp and linkDown notifications are enabled by default on specific
interfaces, but will not be sent unless they are enabled globally. To control
(disable or reenable) the sending of linkUp/linkDown notifications for
specific interfaces, use the no snmp trap link-status command in interface
configuration mode.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/ffun_
c/fcfprt3/fcf014.htm#wp1009050
So, if I'm reading the CD correctly (which can be wrong):
- configuring 'snmp-server enable traps' will not make link-status traps be
sent
- configuring 'snmp-server enable traps snmp' (without any arguments) - will
allow link status traps to be sent (along with a few others traps). Under
this case, if no arguments used, we would need to disable link-status traps on
the interfaces.
Am I on the same wavelength or totally off-base (probably more of the 2nd
option)?
Sean
----- Original Message -----
From: "simon hart" <simon.hart@btinternet.com>
To: "san" <san.study@gmail.com>
Cc: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 3:08 AM
Subject: RE: Snmp and Link-status notification
> Hi San,
>
> Attached is one such link that suggests that link-status traps are sent
> irrespective of the qualifying arguments at the end of the snmp-server host
> statement or the snmp-server enable traps statement.
>
> Tests on my home lab indicate that your understanding is correct. But I am
> a little confused as to why so many people appear to think that this is not
> the case.
>
> http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200404/msg01396.html
>
> Simon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> san
> Sent: 22 May 2005 02:20
> To: simon hart
> Cc: Group Study
> Subject: Re: Snmp and Link-status notification
>
>
> Simon,
>
> According to my understanding, bgp on the host commands makes it to
> send only bgp.
> Can you try without "bgp" at end of host command. (I would assume then
> it will send link-status, according GS archives)
>
> /SAN
>
>
> On 5/21/05, simon hart <simon.hart@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have been through the archives here at GS and have noticed some
>> significant discussion on this topic, with general census of opinion being
>> that if you enter the following command:-
>>
>> snmp-server host 192.168.0.100 public bgp
>> snmp-server enable traps bgp
>>
>> That you have to turn off snmp link-status on each interface as this trap
> is
>> not filtered out when applying arguments to the ends of snmp-server
>> statements. (That is if you are required to only send one kind of trap).
>>
>> I have since tested this out on my home lab, and it really does not appear
>> to be the case. If I debug snmp packet with the commands above
> configured,
>> I can pull interfaces left right and centre without generating an snmp
> trap.
>> Only if I take the arguments out does snmp packets get generated for Link
>> Status (as I would expect), as by doing so I have enabled snmp-server
> enable
>> traps snmp by default and thus will generate RFC 1157 traps.
>>
>> I am keen to understand whether this is correct, as past info on GS seems
> to
>> contradict this and the DocCd is not that clear on the matter.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Simon
>> --
>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>> Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.14 - Release Date: 20/05/2005
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.14 - Release Date: 20/05/2005
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.14 - Release Date: 20/05/2005
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:12:00 GMT-3