From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Nov 27 07:17:47 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id HAA06215 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 07:17:47 -0800 Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA05994 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 07:13:44 -0800 Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id OAA02066; Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:12:45 +0100 From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <199511271312.OAA02066@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: 2.1 release sysinstall To: phk@critter.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 14:12:44 +0100 (MET) Cc: hasty@rah.star-gate.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <2001.817472248@critter.tfs.com> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Nov 27, 95 12:37:09 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 913 Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > Querying foreign hosts with SNMP is considered bad style, and is very > unlikely to yield responses anyway. Personally I would like to use it to extract routing info from routers on the path between my node and some destinations. I assume these info are already communicated to nearby nodes via routed or some other protocol, so I don't believe there is much "sensitive" information. Any ideas on whether this is considered bad style or if there is an alternate/polite way of getting the same info ? Thanks Luigi ==================================================================== Luigi Rizzo Dip. di Ingegneria dell'Informazione email: luigi@iet.unipi.it Universita' di Pisa tel: +39-50-568533 via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) fax: +39-50-568522 http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ ====================================================================