Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Re: [PATCH] SNMP Engine ID dissection

[Thomas Anders <thomas.anders@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wes Hardaker wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:51:55 +0200, Thomas Anders <thomas.anders@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>
> Thomas> That's exactly what this code intends to deal with! Once you see what 
> Thomas> your arbitrary-looking engine ID is built upon, it's much easier to 
> Thomas> decide how likely it is to be unique within your management domain. How 
> Thomas> many people will spot the problem with e.g. 0x80001f88017f000001 w/o 
> Thomas> Ethereal? ;-)
>
> Well, and my point is that snmp implementations should be able to deal
> with the above regardless of whether there is a problem with the
> encoding.  If treated as an arbitrary number of bytes, like most
> implementations do, then it still works regardless of whether or not
> the actual contents of those bytes matter.  Now in the above case,
> that's a bad implementation on the agent's side because it failed to
> create a likely unique engineID.  But my only point is you need to be
> careful and not make assumptions about the format as always being
> true.  IE, make sure the code doesn't crash on: 0x80001f88017f0000

We both seem to agree on all this. :-)


+Thomas

--
Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de)