[ZBX-4910] Zabbix low level discovery rules seem to mistakenly assume that the SNMPv3 'auth' and 'priv' passwords are the same Created: 2012 Apr 24  Updated: 2017 May 30  Resolved: 2012 Apr 26

Status: Closed
Project: ZABBIX BUGS AND ISSUES
Component/s: Server (S)
Affects Version/s: 2.0.0rc2
Fix Version/s: 2.0.0rc4

Type: Incident report Priority: Minor
Reporter: Eric Gearhart Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: snmp, snmpv3
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified
Environment:

RHEN 6.2, net-snmp 5.7, php 5.3


Issue Links:
Duplicate
is duplicated by ZBX-4901 The SNMPv2 " No Such Instance current... Closed

 Description   

I've configured a host with a low level discovery rule, where the SNMPv3 'auth' and 'priv' passwords were different. The low level discovery rule fails to run (it throws an "SNMP error" in zabbix_server.log).

As soon as I changed the 'auth' and 'priv' passwords to the same value, I was able to get the discovery to run.

if you guys need any more info from me, please feel free to let me know (or mark the ticket NEEDINFO or whatever)



 Comments   
Comment by richlv [ 2012 Apr 25 ]

what exactly do you mean by "changed the 'auth' and 'priv' passwords to the same value" ? where were they changed ?

when auth & priv are different, does it work with snmpget ?

Comment by Eric Gearhart [ 2012 Apr 25 ]

I mean that the SNMPv3 auth and priv passwords were not the same... the two passwords were different on the host itself and in the Zabbix discovery rule. I created a brand new SMPv3 user on the device (a Cisco 2811 router) and when I created that new user I made the 'auth' and 'priv' passwords the same. I then changed the low level discovery rule in Zabbix, using the new SNMPv3 user credentials, and LLD started working fine.

Doing SNMP gets the "old fashioned way" by plugging in OID values directly to the host seemed to work fine, with SNMPv3 and separate 'auth' and 'priv' passwords.

Comment by Alexander Vladishev [ 2012 Apr 25 ]

Confirmed in latest trunk.

Comment by Alexander Vladishev [ 2012 Apr 26 ]

Fixed in version pre-2.0.0rc4, revision 27122.

Generated at Fri Apr 26 18:37:45 EEST 2024 using Jira 9.12.4#9120004-sha1:625303b708afdb767e17cb2838290c41888e9ff0.