Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Missing support for SNMPv3 contexts, breaks dot1dTpFdbTable collection #2801

Closed
HON95 opened this issue Feb 14, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

Missing support for SNMPv3 contexts, breaks dot1dTpFdbTable collection #2801

HON95 opened this issue Feb 14, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@HON95
Copy link

HON95 commented Feb 14, 2024

Reported on behalf of NTNU.

We switched to SNMPv3 to use views to limit what NAV change (e.g. so users don't accidentally change the access VLANs for our zero-trust networks, but can still change the interface descriptions). We then noticed that users could no longer track MAC addresses for the network (using the Machine Tracker feature). We've narrowed the problem down to SNMPv3 support in NAV and verified that it works as intended when changing the management profile to SNMPv2 (MAC finally addresses appearing in Machine Tracker).

We've verified that the switches are configured correctly and return the MAC tables from the following commands:

  • SNMPv2 (VLAN 1030): snmpwalk -v2c -c community@1030 sand-100av-sw BRIDGE-MIB::dot1dTpFdbTable
  • SNMPv3 (VLAN 1030): snmpwalk -v3 -l authpriv -u nav -a SHA -A auth_pw -x AES -X priv_pw -n vlan-1030 sand-100av-sw BRIDGE-MIB::dot1dTpFdbTable

Looking at pynetsnmp.py, we can see that the wrapper doesn't take SNMPv3 contexts into account (using the -n parameter).

This seems to be related to the "Research how SNMPv3 contexts affect ipdevpoll's BRIDGE-MIB handling code for Cisco equipment" part in #1177.

@lunkwill42 lunkwill42 self-assigned this Feb 19, 2024
@lunkwill42
Copy link
Member

This seems to be related to the "Research how SNMPv3 contexts affect ipdevpoll's BRIDGE-MIB handling code for Cisco equipment" part in #1177.

You are indeed correct. This is not yet implemented, and we know it. Which is why this issue is tracked as "not done" in #1177, and why the SeedDB SNMPv3 profile forms still warn that SNMPv3 support is not fully complete yet.

The tracked issue in #1117 has been created as #2811

@lunkwill42
Copy link
Member

This is a known issue, tracked by #2811, so closing this a duplicate

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants