ROS 5.0 -- new OIDs for memory-total/memory-used?

RouterOS General
1

After updating a test router from 4.x to 5.0 monitoring scripts started failing with invalid OID errors on the free memory test. Upon investigating it appears that the router’s memory state OIDs have changed between versions. There’s no mention of this in the changelog. However, perhaps this note from rc8 is related:

*) snmp - fixed memory leak for OID 1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2;

Is this a bug or working as intended?

In addition, /system resource print oid no longer gives the cpu load OID, though it does respond to the same OID as in 4.x.

5.0: > /system resource print oid
uptime: .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0
total-hdd-space: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.131073
used-hdd-space: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.131073
total-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.65536
used-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.65536

4.x: > /system resource print oid
uptime: .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0
total-hdd-space: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.1
used-hdd-space: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.1
total-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.2
used-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.2
cpu-load: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.3.3.1.2.1

2

I was facing the same problem using the RCs too.

I contacted support about it, mentioning that this seems like a bug to me, but didn’t get an answer to WHY the oid’s have changed.

3

And it’s just the indices too. No clue why this is needed, honestly. Are we supposed to be reading this as a table, parsing the values by model to make some sort of sense of the results in case they change again? Alternately, are these new indices going to be permanent or subject to change at some future time?

4

facing the same problem using fresh 5.1:

[bda@MikroTik] > system resource print oid
uptime: .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0
total-hdd-space: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.131073
used-hdd-space: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.131073
total-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.65536
used-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.65536

No cpu oids, but old still works…

5

Dear developers, please comment problems we found… It is very difficult to use boxes without snmp memory\disk data…

6

Does anybody have any news about this problem?

7

Im looking for an answer to this also.

How do we get the OID for CPU usage on ROS 5.x +

tks

8

[admin@MikroTik] > system resource cpu print oid
0 load=.1.3.6.1.2.1.25.3.3.1.2.1

9

I’m having the same problem as you are reporting. Bought a brand new rb2011uas-2hnd-in and upgraded to routeros 6 soon as it arrived.

[admin@trunetroutersp01] >  /system resource print oid  
        uptime: .1.3.6.1.2.1.1.3.0
  total-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.65536
   used-memory: .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.65536
[admin@trunetroutersp01] >

snmpwalk on .1.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1 returns:

iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.1.65536 = INTEGER: 65536
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.1.131073 = INTEGER: 131073
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.2.65536 = OID: iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.1.1
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.2.131073 = OID: iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.1.4
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.3.65536 = STRING: "main memory"
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.3.131073 = STRING: "disk: system"
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4.65536 = INTEGER: 1024
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4.131073 = INTEGER: 1024
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.65536 = INTEGER: 131072
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.131073 = INTEGER: 126976
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.65536 = INTEGER: 28316
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.131073 = INTEGER: 15712
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.7.65536 = Counter32: 0
iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.7.131073 = Counter32: 0
10

have you read the last post?
system resource cpu print oid ← right for CPU load
system resource print oid ← wrong for CPU load

11

did you read my post? or better, did you read the post SUBJECT?

I’m talking about memory and disk OIDs, not CPU.

12

so, what is exact problem? according to your post, OIDs shown in ‘print oid’ command are correct, aren’t they?..

13

yes they are, but it’s different from older versions like 5.x and 4.x. on these versions, OIDs ends with .1 and .2 instead of .65536 and .131073. it broke backward compatiblity with some cacti templates I found and I had to manually adjust it.

for me, break compatibility without a good reason is bad.

14

[offtop]does anybody using v4 want to upgrade to v6?[/offtop]

and according to topicstarter, the change was from v4.x to v5.0, it was at least 2 years and 2 months ago. I don’t think they will revert the change which is used by everybody for years :slight_smile:

15

To be fair, the old OIDs worked for years too :stuck_out_tongue: