NetXMS Support Forum

Unfortunately Jython (Python implementation in Java) which is used as foundation for nxshell seems to be stuck on version 2.2. If they eventually release Python 3 version we definitely will update nxshell.

Best regards,
Victor

Hi,

The fact that they do not support dot1dBase affects FDB reading. In FDB dot1dTpFdbPort supposed to contain bridge port number from dot1dBase. It looks like they just put ifIndex there. This we will be able to fix with device driver for those switches. I think that interface rename can be handled by driver as well. I think I'll be able to create driver for them in one of 3.3 patch releases if you can provide me access to test device or send required SNMP walks. You can contact me via PM regarding access or dumps.

Best regards,
Victor

Hi,

I have identified the issue. Problem is in how Fortigate builds index for ipAddressTable. For example, for address 192.168.188.1 OID in ipAddressTable looks like this:

.1.3.6.1.2.1.4.34.1.3.1.192.168.188.1.33

where .1.3.6.1.2.1.4.34.1.3 is base OID, 1 is address type (ipv4 in that case), 192.168.188.1 is IP address, and 33 is interface index (which is also strange because IP MIB does not specify interface index here). But the problem is that generic driver expects IP address prefixed with length, like in this example (taken from H3C switch):

.1.3.6.1.2.1.4.34.1.3.2.16.32.1.4.112.223.51.0.1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1

Here 2 is address type (ipv6), 16 is address length, and 32.1.4.112.223.51.0.1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1 is an address.

So when driver reads interface list from Fortigate it gets correct addresses from ipAddrTable and then picks incorrect addresses from ipAddressTable (168.188.1.33 in this example, shifted by one byte because server skips the one expected to hold address length).

I don't know what format is correct and what is not. Most devices that I have encountered does not support ipAddressTable at all and those that do returns addresses with length prefix. If somebody has better knowledge on this subject - please comment. For now I have added additional checks when reading ipAddressTable for correct value in length field - this should fix issue for Fortigate devices. It will be included into upcoming 3.3 release.

Best regards,
Victor

Just checked - there was a fix in DB init script between 3.2.400 and 3.2.472 for exactly this issue. Completely forgot about it.

Best regards,
Victor

It could be bug in upgrade procedure. This is new access right introduced in version 3.2, so if you have upgraded from older version it may not have been added by database upgrade tool.

Best regards,
Victor

Hi,

make sure that your user has system access right "manage web service definitions".

Best regards,
Victor

It informs server that primary communication address does not belongs to the node itself but only used to communicate with the node somehow. So it is not added to internal indexes, search by this IP address will not return nodes where it is configured as "remote management address", it will not affect topology for such node.

Best regards,
Victor

Hi,

just fixed, new console will be published soon.

Best regards,
Victor

Hi,

just fixed it, updated console (version 3.2.493) will be published soon.

Best regards,
Victor

Попробуйте в свойствах DCI включить опцию "interpret SNMP raw value as" и выбрать подходящий тип данных.

Hi,

it definitely looks like a bug. What is map zoom level when you experience this issue? Or what is approximate area covered?

Best regards,
Victor

I think ssh.nsm was never included into those packages (because it has dependency on libssh). We will discuss it internally, but likely solution is to build libssh and add it to the package together with ssh.nsm.

Best regards,
Victor

Does it appear if you relogin?

Best regards,
Victor

This is really strange. In your first post you mention interface FL-Signage with index 209 as having wrong IP address, but I don't see such interface in walk output. Could you please send me screenshot of overview page and interfaces page for that node? You can send it in PM if it contains sensitive information.

Best regards,
Victor

It could be due to timeout. Server will wait for answer from agent for time specified in server configuration parameter AgentCommandTimeout. If you are accessing remote system over slow link or command execution takes significant amount of time then executeSSHCommand may just timeout.

Best regards,
Victor