SNMP on Cisco 678 (CBOS 2.4.6) broken?!?
Some One
Modem/router with CBOS 2.4.6. I'm very used to polling interface values
from IOS-based devices, however, for some reason I can't get what I need
from my new 678. I try:
snmpget -c (community) (routerip) 1.1.0
just to see if it will respond but I get no replies. I've also tried to
walk the modem, but get nothing back from it there as well.
On the router, I've set up snmp as follows:
set snmp manager (mgmt_station_ip) (community_name) both enabled all
For example, I may have set snmp manager 10.0.0.3 comm1 both enabled all
and tried snmpget -c comm1 10.0.0.1 1.1.0
and gotten Timeout: No Response from 10.0.0.1.
QWest told me that the 678 was the best way to go for users wanting this
type of functionality. I'm starting to wonder if I've been lied to.
-- Anonymous
Doug McIntyre
>I don't seem to be able to get SNMP working on my Cisco 678 DSL
>Modem/router with CBOS 2.4.6. I'm very used to polling interface values
>from IOS-based devices, however, for some reason I can't get what I need
>from my new 678. I try:
>snmpget -c (community) (routerip) 1.1.0
>just to see if it will respond but I get no replies. I've also tried to
>walk the modem, but get nothing back from it there as well.
The 678/CBOS has quite a simplistic SNMP interface, and barely
works. In fact, many bugs have been in CBOS SNMP implementations over
the various versions, and frequently was broken in one way or the
other. In the 2.4.x series, you can only read SNMP data off the LAN
side of the router, it'll refuse to answer to any query for the WAN side.
Further more, you will be unable to walk or bulkwalk the SNMP tables
on a CBOS box, it'll flat out refuse to work. Also, as you've seen a
No OID condition is a flat out no response, not an error response.
Thus, you better know the full exact OID you want to query before you
start out. But depending on versions, it may or may not work for
you. I believe 2.4.6 was fairly working on SNMP.
You should probably specificy absolute fully written out OIDs to get
for SNMPgets.
>QWest told me that the 678 was the best way to go for users wanting this
>type of functionality. I'm starting to wonder if I've been lied to.
Well, their only other supported option, the ActionTec 1520, has no
notion what-so-ever what SNMP is, so I guess their answer is the
correct one. Getting something like a Cisco 827 will give you lots of
SNMP data that you can manipulate, but it may be a bit more than
you'll want to pay. Otherwise, throw another router behind this one in
that supports SNMP well. Of course, those options aren't going to be
support by Qwest at all..
--
Doug McIntyre mer...@visi.com
Network Engineer/Jack of All Trades
Vector Internet Services, Inc.
Some One
Thanks for the tip on the 827. Do you happen to know what MIB entries
I'll need to use for monitoring network throughput, interface status,
etc? I'm glad to hear that the 627 doesn't respond from the WAN side,
but I really wish that Cisco would let users like me control that using
acl's instead of forcing me to do it "their" way.
Doug - I appreciate your insight. :) I would prefer IOS and will
probably wind up with an 827 or something like it but I'm also setting
up a lab to help me study for my CCNP so I'll have at least one 2500 in
the house... :) The only problem I have with using another router to
handle the SNMP data is that it doesn't really give me the functionality
I need such as ability to monitor circuit uptime, etc. I'm still
learning to see what the router does when it sees the DSL go down with
traps, however, I have a lot of work around all that before I can get
the data into a form that works for me.
I'm hoping to talk with the PUC to find out what I can do in requiring
QWest to meet some kind of service level agreement with my DSL beyond I
pay for it only when it's up. I need service reliability and I've had 5
days of "out of service" time in the past two months, largely due to
problems with Actiontec 1520's. Hopefully, this Cisco will improve
uptime, but I still want to hold them to the coals when it's not working.
Bad thing is, I'm thinking of ordering a second DSL just to keep service
reliability up. Now, the question is, can I get them to dynamically
route across the two links? We'll see.
Kevin