Re: [squid3-ipv6] NEW INDEXING SCHEMA for Cache-peer

> Sorry my bad cut-n-paste. I meant to send:
>
I realised.

> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.1.1 = INTEGER: 1
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.1.2 = STRING: "www.google.es"
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.1.3 = INTEGER: 1
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.1.4 = STRING: "64.233.183.104"
> ...
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.2.1 = INTEGER: 2
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.2.2 = STRING: "www.google.es"
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.2.3 = INTEGER: 1
> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.2.4 = STRING: "64.233.183.104"
>

OK, OIDs are ordered, but peer table is indexing by a "double index",
{cache_peer_index-atributefield}. It is not the idea specified by actual
MIB.txt. If you prefer this, start by change the MIB, and then reprogram the
agent acordingly .

However this is not the "standard" way for indexing this sort of instances.
just take a look for the given rfc2465, that of several IPs by ethernet
card . I readapted the idea from there...

And every graphing program should be ready to interpret the correct indexing.

Still if you want to split the output for the two cache peers ( the original
bad copy-n-pastte,you can try the atacched script ) It works but notably
slower...
(Change your ip addresses )

> >
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.1.1 = INTEGER: 1
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.1.2 = INTEGER: 2
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.2.1 = STRING: "www.google.es"
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.2.2 = STRING: "www.google.es"
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.3.1 = INTEGER: 1
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.3.2 = INTEGER: 1
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.4.1 = STRING: "64.233.183.104"
> >> SNMPv2-SMI::enterprises.3495.1.5.1.1.4.2 = STRING: "64.233.183.104"
> >

BTW
- the client table remains IP indexing... I think that is not a problem.
- Where should I upload the scripting tests ? under scripts/? Everything
in-there is perl code... And mine is sh . Any problem with that ?