Welcome to Community Week 2025! Join us to learn, connect, and be recognized as we celebrate the spirit of Community and the power of AI. Get the details  

Discovery SNMPv3 Error "Message processing model 3 returned error: Unknown security name"

Brandon Wilson2
Giga Contributor

Weird issue happening when trying to discover a network device using a schedule. The schedule has no behaviors and no other restrictions. Both the schedule and quick discovery are using the same MID server. 

  • We have a schedule of 118 IP address, many of which have a result of “Active, couldn’t classify”
    • This is typically not an issue and can be resolved fairly easily
    • When I narrow the focus to 1 IP, a small subset of the SNMP OIDs are returned 9 (sometimes 0) out of about 7270
    • The error that is returned in the discovery log is “Message processing model 3 returned error: Unknown security name”
  • Doing a quick discovery on 1 IP has a successful discovery and a CI is created/updated
    • Looking at the SNMP OIDs, about 7270 are returned
    • No errors in log

I have re-created the scheduled with the same result. When doing a scheduled scan it doesn’t classify, but when doing a quick discovery it discovers just fine. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

9 REPLIES 9

Ian Mildon
Tera Guru

Not sure about the SNMPv3 message but if you are getting 0 OID's returned then I would suggest extending your MID Server's mid.snmp.request.timeout and mid.snmp.session.timeout values as they are timing out before you get all the responses back. Try starting at 6000 and 2000 respectively.

Wouldn't I see the same behavior when doing quick discovery? 

Typically, but I was wondering if it could be behaving a little differently due to the schedule "load", while the Quick Discovery is running faster.

My recent findings while testing out Eaton UPS discovery has shown that a 0 OID return is usually a timeout; or an issue with the SNMP community password not being correct (v1/v2). I haven't done anything with v3 at this time.

Changing the parameters seem to have a better result, but still getting having the same issue. I am going to try to increase a bit more and see what happens.