Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Flatly)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

NetXMS Forum

  1. Home
  2. Support
  3. Sonicwall Gen 6 interface IPs misinterpreted

Sonicwall Gen 6 interface IPs misinterpreted

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Support
7 Posts 2 Posters 59.8k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • T
    T
    troffasky
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    In the attached, IPs in green are correct, IPs in red are incorrect. For whatever reason, NetXMS thinks the same IPs are on multiple interfaces. This is not something that just appeared in 4.1.283, I think it's been there a while. It seems to affect Sonicwalls particularly, didn't notice it anywhere else.

    It's not obvious from an snmpwalk how this would arise:

    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.1 = INTEGER: 1
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.2 = INTEGER: 2
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.3 = INTEGER: 3
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.4 = INTEGER: 4
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.5 = INTEGER: 5
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.6 = INTEGER: 6
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.7 = INTEGER: 7
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.8 = INTEGER: 8
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.268484097 = INTEGER: 268484097
    RFC1213-MIB::ifIndex.268486657 = INTEGER: 268486657
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.1 = STRING: "X0 (Portshield Host)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.2 = STRING: "X1 (WAN)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.3 = STRING: "X2 (WAN)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.4 = STRING: "X3 (Portshielded To X0)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.5 = STRING: "X4 (Portshielded To X0)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.6 = STRING: "X5 (Portshielded To X0)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.7 = STRING: "X6 (Portshielded To X0)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.8 = STRING: "U0 (Unassigned)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.268484097 = STRING: "X0:V190 (Guest Wireless)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ifDescr.268486657 = STRING: "X0:V200 (LAN)"
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.88.xx.xx.142 = IpAddress: 88.xx.xx.142
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.94.xx.xx.34 = IpAddress: 94.xx.xx.34
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.172.22.40.1 = IpAddress: 172.22.40.1
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.172.22.140.1 = IpAddress: 172.22.140.1
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.172.22.240.1 = IpAddress: 172.22.240.1
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntIfIndex.88.xx.xx.142 = INTEGER: 3
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntIfIndex.94.xx.xx.34 = INTEGER: 2
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntIfIndex.172.22.40.1 = INTEGER: 268484097
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntIfIndex.172.22.140.1 = INTEGER: 1
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntIfIndex.172.22.240.1 = INTEGER: 268486657
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntNetMask.88.xx.xx.142 = IpAddress: 255.255.255.252
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntNetMask.94.xx.xx.34 = IpAddress: 255.255.255.252
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntNetMask.172.22.40.1 = IpAddress: 255.255.255.0
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntNetMask.172.22.140.1 = IpAddress: 255.255.255.0
    RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntNetMask.172.22.240.1 = IpAddress: 255.255.255.0
    

    ksnip_20220513-145500.png

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • T
      T
      troffasky
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Just occurred to me that I didn't see 127.0.0.1 in any of that, so I looked over the snmpwalk again and this is probably the cause here - the IP-MIB:

      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."88.xx.xx.142" = INTEGER: 4
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."94.xx.xx.34" = INTEGER: 3
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."94.xx.xx.35" = INTEGER: 3
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."127.0.0.1" = INTEGER: 1
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."172.22.40.1" = INTEGER: 10
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."172.22.140.1" = INTEGER: 2
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv4."172.22.240.1" = INTEGER: 11
      IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex.ipv6."00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:01" = INTEGER: 1
      

      The IP-MIB entries look a bit random, there is no interface index 10 or 11!
      Not an SNMP expert but I think the above explains this? Ie, it's a Sonicwall issue, not an NetXMS one.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • T
        T
        troffasky
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        For reference, the above is all about Sonicwall Gen 6 devices. I have added a Gen 7 device to NetXMS, this does not have IP-MIB::ipAddressIfIndex entries and interface table in NetXMS appears as it should do.
        Gen 6 is end of sale and nearing end of life, so this defect will never be fixed by Sonicwall.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • V
          V
          Victor Kirhenshtein
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Hi,

          if data in IP-MIB is incorrect that it definitely can cause strange results. Do those devices provide correct address information under .1.3.6.1.2.1.4.20.1.1 (ipAddrTable)? If yes, I can made small change that will allow to disable usage of .1.3.6.1.2.1.4.20.1.1 (ipAddressTable) for specific devices.

          Best regards,
          Victor

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • T
            T
            troffasky
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Yes, they do:

            RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.88.xx.xx.142 = IpAddress: 88.xx.xx.142
            RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.94.xx.xx.34 = IpAddress: 94.xx.xx.34
            RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.172.22.40.1 = IpAddress: 172.22.40.1
            RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.172.22.140.1 = IpAddress: 172.22.140.1
            RFC1213-MIB::ipAdEntAddr.172.22.240.1 = IpAddress: 172.22.240.1
            
            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • V
              V
              Victor Kirhenshtein
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              I've made changes to disable usage of ipAddrTable and ipAddressTable by setting to true attributes snmp.ignore.ipAddrTable and snmp.ignore.ipAddressTable. Those changes will be included into upcoming patch release.

              Best regards,
              Victor

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • T
                T
                troffasky
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Great work, Victor.
                Added snmp.ignore.ipAddressTable as custom param on this example Sonicwall, re-polled and it now shows the correct IPs after a "Configuration (full)" poll.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0

                Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                Register Login
                Reply
                • Reply as topic
                Log in to reply
                • Oldest to Newest
                • Newest to Oldest
                • Most Votes


                • Login

                • Don't have an account? Register

                • Login or register to search.
                Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                • First post
                  Last post
                0
                • Categories
                • Recent
                • Tags
                • Popular
                • Users
                • Groups