Using sysctl(1) to gather resource consumption data

Norberto Meijome numardbsd at
Wed Sep 17 14:39:34 UTC 2008

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 05:07:49 -0700
David Wolfskill <david at> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 09:11:36PM +1000, Norberto Meijome wrote:
> > ...
> > Out of curiosity, how does bsnmpd compare to your approach with regards to
> > impact on the system. It is part of 7.0 , not sure about previous versions,
> > and it is definitely a more standard and cross platform approach , with
> > support @ NOC / alerting side of things. 
> > 
> > (for what is worth, i've only used net-snmpd , not bsnmpd )...
> Understood.  As I understand it, an SNMP daemon (whether bsnmpd or
> net-snmpd) would require some configuration on the remote host, and I
> wasn't willing to require that.

fair enough. I don't know about the default config of bsnmpd, but "default" in
net-smpd, IIRC, means you access as public, pretty open. Not sure if there are
MIBs for the information you need though.

> Also, the only times I have used SNMP, it has been using a version that
> did not support encryption in any form (as for as I know), and since
> some of the transit was over facilities we don't control, I thought it
> would be a bit more sensible to use SSH for the transport.

but do you use encryption with your current system? 

> Mind, I'm not especially keen on re-inventing stuff that already works
> (or can be reasonably persuaded to work).  But in this case, running an
> SNMP daemon seemed to fail to meet my (admittedly, somewhat self-
> imposed) requirements.

hey , your requirements are yours :) I was just curious to know why snmp didnt
cut it.
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome

"Gravity cannot be blamed for people falling in love."
  Albert Einstein

I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been

More information about the freebsd-performance mailing list