PipoCanaja

Hi @georgesnow Could you check the test data and add it to this PR ? Thx

Seems that you are right. But without any details, we cannot help you. We need details on the device (vendor, OS recognised in LibreNMS at least).

test re-run hopefully

Looks like a bug on this FortiSwitch 200E precisely, yes. Please open a case at the vendor.

Hi @TheMysteriousX I am not sure of this update at all. Concerning "entPhysicalIndex_measured", it should only be "ports" to be of any use in LibreNMS code currently. Any other value...

In fact, those affected OS are indeed not correct in their use of this column. The data they put in it is useless. So the only fix here is to...

For `includes/discovery/sensors/state/hirschmann.inc.php` the fix is quite easy : ``` librenms@monitoring1:~$ git diff includes/discovery/sensors/state/hirschmann.inc.php diff --git a/includes/discovery/sensors/state/hirschmann.inc.php b/includes/discovery/sensors/state/hirschmann.inc.php index 47561f27e..2d3befe88 100644 --- a/includes/discovery/sensors/state/hirschmann.inc.php +++ b/includes/discovery/sensors/state/hirschmann.inc.php @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ if ($device['os']...

And for Junos : ``` librenms@monitoring1:~$ git diff includes/definitions/discovery/junos.yaml diff --git a/includes/definitions/discovery/junos.yaml b/includes/definitions/discovery/junos.yaml index a377c3553..06c0c5609 100644 --- a/includes/definitions/discovery/junos.yaml +++ b/includes/definitions/discovery/junos.yaml @@ -257,9 +257,7 @@ modules: oid: jnxRpmResultsSummaryTable value: jnxRpmResSumPercentLost num_oid:...

And with those 2 file updated, and test data re-computed, you can remove all schema changes and we'll be good to go.

@TheMysteriousX Would you be OK to do it in this PR ?