[Nut-upsuser] Any word on when the ietf mib will be fixed for liebert?

[Arjen de Korte]

Citeren Maurice Volaski <mvolaski op aecom.yu.edu>:

>> Please don't mistake warning messages with (fatal) errors. Starting  
>> with nut-2.4.0, these messages should only be displayed in debug  
>> mode, so I'm surprised you're seeing them in nut-2.4.1.
>
> It doesn't seem this way from my reading of the source code:
>
> upslogx(LOG_ERR, "[%s] %s: Error in packet: %s",

This is a different message from what you reported before. These where  
logged with 'nut_snmp_get' in them and these lines should now be gone  
(unless running in debug mode 2 or higher).

> From what I can tell, that's a regular log message of an error, not  
> a debug mode message, which would use either "upsdebugx" or "debug",  
> or a warning, which would use upslogx with "LOG_WARNING".

Indeed, but this is in the lines you posted.

>> Upon startup, the snmp-ups driver will query the UPS for all the  
>> OID's the driver supports. The ones which are not supported by the  
>> UPS, will
>
> In addition, the errors are continually output to syslog; they don't  
> just appear once and stop.

It looks like this is a different problem than what you mentioned  
before. Please be specific.

>> generally result in an error message from the NetSNMP library that is
>> used. There is nothing we can do about that and it is *not* an error.
>
> Perhaps you could change LOG_ERR to  LOG_WARNING and perhaps you can  
> ignore it after the first time it appears.

We already do rate limiting for repeating errors. After startup, these  
really shouldn't appear, which means there is probably something wrong  
(and we want to know about that).

>> > Anyway, now that the script is starting, I'm seeing "failed - got
>> > [ERR ACCESS-DENIED]" errors  from upsmon, and I don't know why.
>>
>> See 'man 8 upsd', 'man 5 upsd.conf' and 'man 5 upsd.users'. This is a
>> configuration error.
>
> My nut configuration is fine. To troubleshoot this, I had to label  
> each one of ACCESS-DENIED errors in the code, and with that, I  
> determined that the one involving tcp-wrappers was complaining. It  
> appears that local network communication is hard coded with  
> 127.0.0.1. In my /etc/hosts.allow, I just have "ALL:localhost", with  
> no 127.0.0.1. TCP wrappers doesn't know or check that they're the  
> same, so I once I added it, it started working. :-) Presumably,  
> previous versions used localhost.

No, previous versions didn't use tcp-wrappers. That's why I pointed  
you to 'man 8 upsd.conf' which has a paragraph ACCESS CONTROL that  
tells you that we use tcp-wrappers. It's true that we only do a lookup  
for the IP, not the hostname. Although it is common to include both  
hostname and IP in hosts.allow, we probably should make a note to that  
effect.

Best regards, Arjen
-- 
Please keep list traffic on the list