Yes, they LLDP implementation is full of inconsistencies. In LLDP local port table switch reports lldpLocPortIdSubtype as 7 (which is "local") and lldpLocPortId as number from 1 to 10, however when looking from other device we see that switch advertises same ports as Id subtype 5 ("interface name"). According to specification it is "a port identifier based on the ifName MIB object, defined in IETF RFC 2863.". However, it doesn't match actual interface name as reported via interface MIB.
Let's check walk results for OID .1.3.6.1.2.1.31.1.1.1.1 in case they report different names via ifTable and ifXTable. If this is not the case then all we can do is to add special handling in LLDP code for that particular type of switches.
Best regards,
Victor
Let's check walk results for OID .1.3.6.1.2.1.31.1.1.1.1 in case they report different names via ifTable and ifXTable. If this is not the case then all we can do is to add special handling in LLDP code for that particular type of switches.
Best regards,
Victor