[Devmon-devel] [ devmon-Bugs-3463155 ] Cisco-6509 wrong oids for serial

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Bugs item #3463155, was opened at 2011-12-20 19:56
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by buchanmilne
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=816977&aid=3463155&group_id=160720

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Templates
Group: None
Status: Open
>Resolution: Later
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Richard Finegold (goldfndr)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Cisco-6509 wrong oids for serial

Initial Comment:
On a Cisco 6509 here, the serial number oids don't have readable values; I was getting "Missing repeater data for primary OID entPhysicalDescr". The oid given for entPhysicalDescr (and duplicated as entPhysicalModelName) should actually be moduleModel; within the OID, I think only moduleStatus has the MIB-derived name.
 
 While searching the snmpwalk output, I did find better output at "ciscoMgmt.92", but that's deprecated. I later found good output at .47 (from the entity MIB) so I copied the cisco-2811 template's serial subdirectory. The output is good now (status=green instead of clear).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Buchan Milne (buchanmilne)
Date: 2013-01-03 07:38

Message:
On our 6509s (7) and 7613s (2) we get results from both the OIDs in the
existing 6509 template and from ENTITY-MIB. However, results from
ENTITY-MIB contain rows for each port, temperature sensor, voltage sensor
etc., whereas the current test only  contains a row per module. In the case
of a 6500 or 7600 with a few dense blades, it results in a few hundred rows
(361 for one 6509, 358 for another, 406 for one 7600). While it may be
information that will be useful on (rare) occasion, I don't know if it
makes sense.

Our 6500s are running 12.2(18)SXD7b, our 7600s are running 12.2(33)SRC2.

It may be more worthwhile at some stage to allow more flexible association
of MIBs to devices than the current method.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=816977&aid=3463155&group_id=160720