• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
snmp / netdiscovery loop
#1
It looks like the agent is going into a loop when it queries an emc celerra on our network. The perl process just spins on the same query


10:10:49.852596 IP hostname1.domain.46902 > hostname2.domain.snmp: GetNextRequest(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress
10:10:49.853391 IP hostname2.domain.snmp > hostname1.domain.46902: GetResponse(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress=[endOfMibView]
10:10:49.854088 IP hostname1.domain.46902 > hostname2.domain.snmp: GetNextRequest(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress
10:10:49.854927 IP hostname2.domain.snmp > hostname1.domain.46902: GetResponse(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress=[endOfMibView]
10:10:49.856513 IP hostname1.domain.46902 > hostname2.domain.snmp: GetNextRequest(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress
10:10:49.857399 IP hostname2.domain.snmp > hostname1.domain.46902: GetResponse(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress=[endOfMibView]
10:10:49.858215 IP hostname1.domain.46902 > hostname2.domain.snmp: GetNextRequest(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress
10:10:49.858885 IP hostname2.domain.snmp > hostname1.domain.46902: GetResponse(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress=[endOfMibView]
10:10:49.859536 IP hostname1.domain.46902 > hostname2.domain.snmp: GetNextRequest(29) interfaces.ifTable.ifEntry.ifPhysAddress

(this seems to continue on for ever until I kill it.)

I also get this in an strace of the process:

[pid 31518] getpeername(4, 0x2aaaac02a090, [1827281878894248192]) = -1 ENOTCONN (Transport endpoint is not connected)
[pid 31518] sendto(4, "0*\2\1\1\4\6public\241\35\2\4c\5\4\216\2\1\0\2\1\0000\0170\r\6"..., 44, 0, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(161), sin_addr=inet_addr("x.x.x.x")}, 16) = 44


I tried adding the host to the inventory blacklist, but it doesn't seem to affect the snmp query. is there a way to exclude specific ip's within a range from the netdiscovery / snmp scans?

thanks!
  Reply
#2
No, but there is a ticket for this.
Co-leader, official developper
DCS official PARTNER: dcs.glpi@dcsit-group.com
  Reply
#3
ok, thanks... in the meantime i've created two ranges out of that subnet and left the offending ip out of it...
  Reply
#4
entr04y Wrote:ok, thanks... in the meantime i've created two ranges out of that subnet and left the offending ip out of it...

Well, now when it runs the scans for the network range x.x.x.1 through x.x.x.8 it scans ip's from the other range which is x.x.x.10 through x.x.x.254, so something isn't right there.
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)