[PacketFence-users] SG300 / SG500 couldn't get MAC at ifIndex

Discussion:

Stefan Sabolowitsch

2017-04-30 11:13:21 UTC

Hi there,
have here SG300 / SG500, but packetfence get no MAC at index.

Apr 28 18:06:56 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) INFO: [mac:[undef]] up trap received on 172.16.32.249 ifIndex 51 (main::handleTrap)
Apr 28 18:06:56 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) INFO: [mac:[undef]] setting 172.16.32.249 port 51 to MAC detection VLAN (main::handleTrap)
Apr 28 18:06:56 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) WARN: [mac:[undef]] Should set ifIndex 51 to VLAN 4 but the switch is not in production -> Do nothing (pf::Switch::setVlan)
Apr 28 18:07:04 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) WARN: [mac:[undef]] couldn't get MAC at ifIndex 51. This is a problem. (pf::Switch::_getMacAtIfIndex)

2017-04-28|15:51:38|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBIND
INGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255971270) 29 days, 15:01:52.70|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.3|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.1.51 = INTEGER: 51|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.7.51 = INTEGER: up(1)|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.8.51 = INTEGER: down(2) END VARIABLEBINDINGS

2017-04-28|15:51:42|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBIND
INGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255971678) 29 days, 15:01:56.78|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.0.185|.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.2.3.1.0 = STRING: "%SEC-W-PORTUNAUTHORIZED: Port gi3 is unAuthorized"|.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.2.3.2.0 = INTEGER: 1 END VARIABLEBINDINGS

2017-04-28|15:51:42|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBINDINGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255971680) 29 days, 15:01:56.80|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.4|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.1.51 = INTEGER: 51|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.7.51 = INTEGER: up(1)|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.8.51 = INTEGER: up(1) END VARIABLEBINDINGS

2017-04-28|15:51:46|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBINDINGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255972128) 29 days, 15:02:01.28|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.0.151|.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.2.3.1.0 = STRING: "%STP-W-PORTSTATUS: gi3: STP status Forwarding

[***@PacketFence-ZEN logs]# /usr/local/pf/bin/pfcmd_vlan -getMAC -verbose 4 -switch 172.16.32.249 -ifIndex 51
TRACE - Memory configuration is still valid for key config::Switch in local cached_hash
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='Default', key='HASH(0x3b53988)', cache='RawMemory', time='0ms': MISS (not in cache)
DEBUG - cache set for namespace='Default', key='{"encoding":null,"reconnect":"60","server":"127.0.0.1:6379"}', size=1, expires='never', cache='RawMemory', time='0ms'
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='switch.overlay', key='172.16.32.249', cache='Redis', time='6ms': MISS (not in cache)
DEBUG - creating new pf::Switch::Cisco::SG300 object
DEBUG - start handling 'getMac' command
DEBUG - attempt 1 to obtain mac at 172.16.32.249 ifIndex 51
DEBUG - opening SNMP v2c read connection to 172.16.32.249
TRACE - SNMP get_request for sysLocation: 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.6.0
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='Default', key='HASH(0x3b53988)', cache='RawMemory', time='0ms': HIT
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='switch', key='ARRAY(0x9f92f90)', cache='Redis', time='1ms': MISS (not in cache)
DEBUG - cache set for namespace='switch', key='["172.16.32.249",["-varbindlist",["1.3.6.1.2.1.1.6.0"]]]', size=48, expires='10m', cache='Redis', time='1ms'
TRACE - SNMP get_request for vmVlan: 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.68.1.2.2.1.2.51
TRACE - SNMP get_table for ifPhysAddress: 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.6
TRACE - SNMP get_table for dot1dBasePortIfIndex: 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.1.4.1.2
TRACE - SNMP get_table for dot1dTpFdbPort: 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.2
WARN - couldn't get MAC at ifIndex 51. This is a problem.
DEBUG - attempt 2 to obtain mac at 172.16.32.249 ifIndex 51
TRACE - SNMP get_request for vmVlan: 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.68.1.2.2.1.2.51
TRACE - SNMP get_table for ifPhysAddress: 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.6
TRACE - SNMP get_table for dot1dBasePortIfIndex: 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.1.4.1.2

thanks for any help here.
Stefan

Fabrice Durand

2017-05-01 14:16:14 UTC

Permalink

Hello Stefan,

can you take a capture on udp port 161 between PacketFence and the switch ?

Also can you do a snmpwalk on this oid : 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.2

Last question, is it the correct ifIndex (51) ?

Regards

Fabrice

Post by Stefan Sabolowitsch
Hi there,
have here SG300 / SG500, but packetfence get no MAC at index.
Apr 28 18:06:56 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) INFO: [mac:[undef]] up trap received on 172.16.32.249 ifIndex 51 (main::handleTrap)
Apr 28 18:06:56 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) INFO: [mac:[undef]] setting 172.16.32.249 port 51 to MAC detection VLAN (main::handleTrap)
Apr 28 18:06:56 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) WARN: [mac:[undef]] Should set ifIndex 51 to VLAN 4 but the switch is not in production -> Do nothing (pf::Switch::setVlan)
Apr 28 18:07:04 PacketFence-ZEN packetfence: pfsetvlan(3) WARN: [mac:[undef]] couldn't get MAC at ifIndex 51. This is a problem. (pf::Switch::_getMacAtIfIndex)
2017-04-28|15:51:38|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBIND
INGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255971270) 29 days, 15:01:52.70|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.3|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.1.51 = INTEGER: 51|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.7.51 = INTEGER: up(1)|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.8.51 = INTEGER: down(2) END VARIABLEBINDINGS
2017-04-28|15:51:42|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBIND
INGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255971678) 29 days, 15:01:56.78|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.0.185|.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.2.3.1.0 = STRING: "%SEC-W-PORTUNAUTHORIZED: Port gi3 is unAuthorized"|.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.2.3.2.0 = INTEGER: 1 END VARIABLEBINDINGS
2017-04-28|15:51:42|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBINDINGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255971680) 29 days, 15:01:56.80|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.5.4|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.1.51 = INTEGER: 51|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.7.51 = INTEGER: up(1)|.1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.8.51 = INTEGER: up(1) END VARIABLEBINDINGS
2017-04-28|15:51:46|UDP: [172.16.32.249]:161->[172.16.32.23]:162|0.0.0.0|BEGIN TYPE 0 END TYPE BEGIN SUBTYPE 0 END SUBTYPE BEGIN VARIABLEBINDINGS .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0 = Timeticks: (255972128) 29 days, 15:02:01.28|.1.3.6.1.6.3.1.1.4.1.0 = OID: .1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.0.151|.1.3.6.1.4.1.9.6.1.101.2.3.1.0 = STRING: "%STP-W-PORTSTATUS: gi3: STP status Forwarding
TRACE - Memory configuration is still valid for key config::Switch in local cached_hash
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='Default', key='HASH(0x3b53988)', cache='RawMemory', time='0ms': MISS (not in cache)
DEBUG - cache set for namespace='Default', key='{"encoding":null,"reconnect":"60","server":"127.0.0.1:6379"}', size=1, expires='never', cache='RawMemory', time='0ms'
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='switch.overlay', key='172.16.32.249', cache='Redis', time='6ms': MISS (not in cache)
DEBUG - creating new pf::Switch::Cisco::SG300 object
DEBUG - start handling 'getMac' command
DEBUG - attempt 1 to obtain mac at 172.16.32.249 ifIndex 51
DEBUG - opening SNMP v2c read connection to 172.16.32.249
TRACE - SNMP get_request for sysLocation: 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.6.0
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='Default', key='HASH(0x3b53988)', cache='RawMemory', time='0ms': HIT
DEBUG - cache get for namespace='switch', key='ARRAY(0x9f92f90)', cache='Redis', time='1ms': MISS (not in cache)
DEBUG - cache set for namespace='switch', key='["172.16.32.249",["-varbindlist",["1.3.6.1.2.1.1.6.0"]]]', size=48, expires='10m', cache='Redis', time='1ms'
TRACE - SNMP get_request for vmVlan: 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.68.1.2.2.1.2.51
TRACE - SNMP get_table for ifPhysAddress: 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.6
TRACE - SNMP get_table for dot1dBasePortIfIndex: 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.1.4.1.2
TRACE - SNMP get_table for dot1dTpFdbPort: 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.2
WARN - couldn't get MAC at ifIndex 51. This is a problem.
DEBUG - attempt 2 to obtain mac at 172.16.32.249 ifIndex 51
TRACE - SNMP get_request for vmVlan: 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.68.1.2.2.1.2.51
TRACE - SNMP get_table for ifPhysAddress: 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.6
TRACE - SNMP get_table for dot1dBasePortIfIndex: 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.1.4.1.2
thanks for any help here.
Stefan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users

--
Fabrice Durand
***@inverse.ca :: +1.514.447.4918 (x135) :: www.inverse.ca
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (http://www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (http://packetfence.org)

Stefan Sabolowitsch

2017-05-03 16:02:16 UTC

Permalink

Bonjour Fabrice,
Tout d'abord vous remercier de PacketFence.

A pcap file is attached to this mail.
172.16.32.249 = SG300 Switch
172.16.32.23 = PacketFence

[***@PacketFence-ZEN etc]# snmpwalk -v 2c -c public 172.16.32.249 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.2
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.20.253.22.202.8 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.119.111.168 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.212.11.128 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.218.156.228 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.218.158.212 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.26.75.49.217.63 = INTEGER: 56
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.26.232.26.196.154 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.28.66.103.179.230 = INTEGER: 49
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.29.9.221.232.11 = INTEGER: 51
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.30.103.151.242.53 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.31.18.35.23.133 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.37.0.241.239.58 = INTEGER: 49
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.64.157.68.249.43 = INTEGER: 57
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.80.86.148.71.55 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.192.183.78.154.181 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.52.219.253.131.216.9 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.52.219.253.131.216.18 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.124.117 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.124.127 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.124.249 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.125.3 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.125.193 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.125.203 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.129 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.139 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.151 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.161 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.127.181 = INTEGER: 0
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.133.130 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.133.140 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.120.215.95.149.164.18 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.128.232.111.3.136.192 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.128.232.111.3.136.196 = INTEGER: 58

Last question, is it the correct ifIndex (51) ?
Yes, please look here.
[***@PacketFence-ZEN etc]# snmpget -v 2c -c public 172.16.32.249 .1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.1.0.29.9.221.232.11
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.1.0.29.9.221.232.11 = Hex-STRING: 00 1D 09 DD E8 0B

Needed MAC Address on ifindex 51

Best regards.
Stefan

-#-#-#-#-#-#--#-#-#-#-#-#-#

Am 01.05.17, 16:16 schrieb "***@inverse.ca -- Fabrice Durand" <***@inverse.ca>:

Hello Stefan,

can you take a capture on udp port 161 between PacketFence and the switch ?

Also can you do a snmpwalk on this oid : 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.2

Last question, is it the correct ifIndex (51) ?

Regards

Fabrice

--
Fabrice Durand
***@inverse.ca :: +1.514.447.4918 (x135) :: www.inverse.ca
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (http://www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (http://packetfence.org)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-***@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users

Fabrice Durand

2017-05-03 20:04:36 UTC

Permalink

Hello Stefan,

it looks that snmpget 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1.51 return nothing.

Can you try snmpwalk 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1 ?

Regards

Fabrice

Post by Stefan Sabolowitsch
Bonjour Fabrice,
Tout d'abord vous remercier de PacketFence.
A pcap file is attached to this mail.
172.16.32.249 = SG300 Switch
172.16.32.23 = PacketFence
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.20.253.22.202.8 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.119.111.168 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.212.11.128 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.218.156.228 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.21.23.218.158.212 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.26.75.49.217.63 = INTEGER: 56
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.26.232.26.196.154 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.28.66.103.179.230 = INTEGER: 49
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.29.9.221.232.11 = INTEGER: 51
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.30.103.151.242.53 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.31.18.35.23.133 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.37.0.241.239.58 = INTEGER: 49
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.64.157.68.249.43 = INTEGER: 57
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.80.86.148.71.55 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.0.192.183.78.154.181 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.52.219.253.131.216.9 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.52.219.253.131.216.18 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.124.117 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.124.127 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.124.249 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.125.3 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.125.193 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.125.203 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.129 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.139 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.151 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.126.161 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.127.181 = INTEGER: 0
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.133.130 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.80.6.171.53.133.140 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.120.215.95.149.164.18 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.128.232.111.3.136.192 = INTEGER: 58
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.2.128.232.111.3.136.196 = INTEGER: 58
Last question, is it the correct ifIndex (51) ?
Yes, please look here.
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.1.0.29.9.221.232.11 = Hex-STRING: 00 1D 09 DD E8 0B
Needed MAC Address on ifindex 51
Best regards.
Stefan
-#-#-#-#-#-#--#-#-#-#-#-#-#
Hello Stefan,
can you take a capture on udp port 161 between PacketFence and the switch ?
Also can you do a snmpwalk on this oid : 1.3.6.1.2.1.17.4.3.1.2
Last question, is it the correct ifIndex (51) ?
Regards
Fabrice

--
Fabrice Durand
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (http://www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (http://packetfence.org)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users

--
Fabrice Durand
***@inverse.ca :: +1.514.447.4918 (x135) :: www.inverse.ca
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (http://www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (http://packetfence.org)

Stefan Sabolowitsch

2017-05-04 15:03:42 UTC

Permalink

Hi Fabrice,
SG300 / SG500 do not know CISCO-PORT-SECURITY-MIB 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1

[***@PacketFence-ZEN etc]# snmpwalk -v 2c -c public 172.16.32.249 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1
SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1 = No Such Object available on this agent at this OID

Regards
Stefan

.#.#.#.#.#.
Am 03.05.17, 22:04 schrieb "***@inverse.ca -- Fabrice Durand" <***@inverse.ca>:

Hello Stefan,

it looks that snmpget 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1.51 return nothing.

Can you try snmpwalk 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1 ?

Regards

Fabrice

Fabrice Durand

2017-05-04 15:32:44 UTC

Permalink

Hello Stefan,

i asked one of my coworker who worked with this sort of switches and
portsec is not working with packetfence.

What you can do is to use it with radius
(https://packetfence.org/doc/PacketFence_Network_Devices_Configuration_Guide.html#_cisco_small_business)

Regards

Fabrice

Post by Stefan Sabolowitsch
Hi Fabrice,
SG300 / SG500 do not know CISCO-PORT-SECURITY-MIB 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1
SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1 = No Such Object available on this agent at this OID
Regards
Stefan
.#.#.#.#.#.
Hello Stefan,
it looks that snmpget 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1.51 return nothing.
Can you try snmpwalk 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.315.1.2.1.1.1 ?
Regards
Fabrice

--
Fabrice Durand
***@inverse.ca :: +1.514.447.4918 (x135) :: www.inverse.ca
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (http://www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (http://packetfence.org)

Stefan Sabolowitsch

2017-05-04 15:52:47 UTC

Permalink

Hi Fabrice,
thanks for your help, I will test it.
In this example for “cisco small business”, a SG500 is specified as the switch type,

-#-#-
Once you have configured your switchports, you must configure the switch in PacketFence with the following information:
Definition→Type: Cisco SG500
Definition→Mode: production
#-#--#

however i find for the selection only a Cisco::SG300.
How i find this “Cisco SG500” ?

Regards
Stefan

#####

Am 04.05.17, 17:32 schrieb "***@inverse.ca -- Fabrice Durand" <***@inverse.ca>:

Hello Stefan,

i asked one of my coworker who worked with this sort of switches and
portsec is not working with packetfence.

What you can do is to use it with radius
(https://packetfence.org/doc/PacketFence_Network_Devices_Configuration_Guide.html#_cisco_small_business)

Regards

Fabrice

--
Fabrice Durand
***@inverse.ca :: +1.514.447.4918 (x135) :: www.inverse.ca
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (http://www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence (http://packetfence.org)