Frank Strauss wrote:

Kristine Adamson wrote:

...

In an AGENT-CAPABILITIES construct, we have specified the following VARIATION clause for the coldStart trap from RFC1907:

VARIATION coldStart DESCRIPTION "A coldStart trap is generated on all reboots."

When using smilint against the file containing this VARIATION, we

receive

...

the following errors:

./IBMTCPIPMVS-CAPS:250: SYNTAX is not allowed in a notification

variation

...

./IBMTCPIPMVS-CAPS:250: WRITE-SYNTAX is not allowed in a notification variation ./IBMTCPIPMVS-CAPS:250: CREATION-REQUIRES is not allowed in a

notification

...

variation ./IBMTCPIPMVS-CAPS:250: default value is not allowed in a notification variation

Should we be permitted to specify a VARIATION for a notification?

From the error messages I assume that the referred VARIATION clause

defined

in line 250 of the MIB module file contains more "sub-constructs", namely SYNTAX, WRITE-SYNTAX, CREATION-REQUIRES and DEFVAL. If not, please send me (personally, if you don't want to send it to the list) the complete MIB so that I can reconstruct the problem. If my assumption is right:

Frank, Thanks for your quick feedback. The VARIATION clause for the notification contains only the DESCRIPTION clause. Here is the AGENT-CAPABILITIES construct with the SUPPORTS clause on which we get the error messages:

ibmTcpIpMvsAgtCaps AGENT-CAPABILITIES PRODUCT-RELEASE "IBM Communications Server Version 1 Release 4 SNMP Agent" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "IBM Communications Server Agent"

SUPPORTS SNMPv2-MIB -- RFC 1907 INCLUDES { systemGroup, snmpGroup, snmpSetGroup, snmpBasicNotificationsGroup, snmpCommunityGroup } VARIATION coldStart DESCRIPTION "A coldStart trap is generated on all reboots."

There are additional SUPPORTS clauses that follow the above SUPPORTS clause. Thanks for your help!

Please read RFC 2580. Variations are possible for notifications as well as for objects. But some "sub-constructs" of a VARIATION are not meaningful and not allowed for notifications.

What meaning would you expect from a "refined" syntax for a notification (that cannot have a syntax)? :-) Similarly, a notification cannot be "created" in the sense that the CREATION-REQUIRES construct refers to. And a notifcation cannot have a default value, so that a DEFVAL construct also does not make sense in a notification variation.

-- !! This message is brought to you via the `libsmi' mailing list. !! Please do not reply to this message to unsubscribe. To unsubscribe or adjust !! your settings, send a mail message to libsmi-request@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de !! or look at https://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/mailman/listinfo/libsmi.