Skip to content
DataMiner DoJo

More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Search in posts
Search in pages
Log in
Menu
  • Updates & Insights
  • Questions
  • Learning
    • E-learning Courses
    • Empower Replay: Limited Edition
    • Tutorials
    • Open Classroom Training
    • Certification
      • DataMiner Fundamentals
      • DataMiner Configurator
      • DataMiner Automation
      • Scripts & Connectors Developer: HTTP Basics
      • Scripts & Connectors Developer: SNMP Basics
      • Visual Overview – Level 1
      • Verify a certificate
    • YouTube Videos
    • Solutions & Use Cases
      • Solutions
      • Use Case Library
    • Agility
      • Book your Agile Fundamentals training
      • Book you Kanban workshop
      • Learn more about Agile
        • Agile Webspace
        • Everything Agile
          • The Agile Manifesto
          • Best Practices
          • Retro Recipes
        • Methodologies
          • The Scrum Framework
          • Kanban
          • Extreme Programming
        • Roles
          • The Product Owner
          • The Agile Coach
          • The Quality & UX Coach (QX)
    • >> Go to DataMiner Docs
  • DevOps
    • About the DevOps Program
    • Sign up for the DevOps Pogram
    • DataMiner DevOps Support
    • Feature Suggestions
    • Climb the leaderboard!
    • Swag Shop
  • Downloads
  • Contact
    • Sales, Training & Certification
    • DataMiner Support
    • Global Feedback Survey
  • PARTNERS
    • All Partners
    • Technology Partners
    • Strategic Partner Program
    • Solutions
    • Deal Registration
  • >> Go to dataminer.services

SNMP Table returning wrong OID value

Solved487 views30th October 2024SNMP snmp table snmpv2
1
Micah Brown [SLC] [DevOps Advocate]295 25th October 2024 2 Comments

Within a table in an element, I'm expecting for the OID "1.3.6.1.4.1.6827.50.9.1.1.5.1.1" to return "-100" according to the simulation ran on the device. However, after doing a wireshark on the same device, a value of "4294967196" is being returned instead. They're both using the same "Integer32" type, yet this issue persists.
The wireshark response:

Value retrieved by the simulation:

<Definition OID="1.3.6.1.4.1.6827.50.475.9.1.1.5.1.1" Type="Integer32" ReturnValue="-100" />

This is causing the table to return incomplete:

While the simulation made on the same device returns this:

The XML for both of the parameters:

<Param id="1306" trending="true">
<Name>systemQsfpMonitorRxPowerLevel</Name>
<Description>Rx Power Level (QSFP Monitor)</Description>
<Type>read</Type>
<Information>
<Subtext>The received (Rx) power level of QSFP.</Subtext>
</Information>
<Interprete>
<RawType>numeric text</RawType>
<Type>double</Type>
<LengthType>next param</LengthType>
<Sequence noset="true">div:100</Sequence>
</Interprete>
<SNMP>
<Enabled>true</Enabled>
<Type>integer</Type>
<OID type="complete">1.3.6.1.4.1.6827.50.475.9.1.1.5</OID>
</SNMP>
<!-- SuppressValidator 2.5.1 Default threshold not given -->
<Alarm>
<Monitored>true</Monitored>
</Alarm>
<!-- /SuppressValidator 2.5.1 -->
<Display>
<RTDisplay>true</RTDisplay>
<Range>
<Low>-100</Low>
<High>6</High>
</Range>
<Units>dBm</Units>
<Decimals>2</Decimals>
</Display>
<Measurement>
<Type>number</Type>
</Measurement>
</Param>

<Param id="1307" trending="true">
<Name>systemQsfpMonitorTxOpticalLevel</Name>
<Description>Tx Power Level (QSFP Monitor)</Description>
<Type>read</Type>
<Information>
<Subtext>The transmitted (Tx) power level of QSFP.</Subtext>
</Information>
<Interprete>
<RawType>numeric text</RawType>
<Type>double</Type>
<LengthType>next param</LengthType>
<Sequence noset="true">div:100</Sequence>
</Interprete>
<SNMP>
<Enabled>true</Enabled>
<Type>integer</Type>
<OID type="complete">1.3.6.1.4.1.6827.50.475.9.1.1.6</OID>
</SNMP>
<!-- SuppressValidator 2.5.1 Default threshold not given -->
<Alarm>
<Monitored>true</Monitored>
</Alarm>
<!-- /SuppressValidator 2.5.1 -->
<Display>
<RTDisplay>true</RTDisplay>
<Range>
<Low>-100</Low>
<High>6</High>
</Range>
<Units>dBm</Units>
<Decimals>2</Decimals>
</Display>
<Measurement>
<Type>number</Type>
</Measurement>
</Param>

Marieke Goethals [SLC] [DevOps Catalyst] Selected answer as best 30th October 2024
Miguel Obregon [SLC] [DevOps Catalyst] commented 28th October 2024

Hi Micah,
Could it be that the value retrieved (4294967196) represents an unsigned integer? When you convert this value to a signed integer, the value is equal to -100.

Micah Brown [SLC] [DevOps Advocate] commented 28th October 2024

Hi Miguel,

I just tried to change the parameters to use “uinteger32” and “integer32” but the values still wouldn’t fill in on the table. I added to the original post what both of the parameters look like.

1 Answer

  • Active
  • Voted
  • Newest
  • Oldest
0
Laurens Moutton [SLC] [DevOps Enabler]9.02K Posted 29th October 2024 1 Comment

This is the same issue that is described here. In short: that is a firmware issue, the Wireshark screenshot also that the value length is wrong.

Regards,

Marieke Goethals [SLC] [DevOps Catalyst] Selected answer as best 30th October 2024
Micah Brown [SLC] [DevOps Advocate] commented 29th October 2024

Hi Laurens. I’ll work on contacting the device manufacturer to mention this firmware issue. Thank you!

You are viewing 1 out of 1 answers, click here to view all answers.
Please login to be able to comment or post an answer.

My DevOps rank

DevOps Members get more insights on their profile page.

My user earnings

0 Dojo credits

Spend your credits in our swag shop.

0 Reputation points

Boost your reputation, climb the leaderboard.

Promo banner DataMiner DevOps Professiona Program
DataMiner Integration Studio (DIS)
Empower Katas
Privacy Policy • Terms & Conditions • Contact

© 2025 Skyline Communications. All rights reserved.

DOJO Q&A widget

Can't find what you need?

? Explore the Q&A DataMiner Docs

[ Placeholder content for popup link ] WordPress Download Manager - Best Download Management Plugin