(alex)
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 9:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Chris Lonvick (clonvick); [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #2, max message size - Need to resolve this
I think there is general agreement to specify minimum msg
size, not maximum msg size in syslog-protocol
: Thursday, December 01, 2005 8:36 PM
To: David B Harrington
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #2, max message size - Need to resolve this
Hi David,
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, David B Harrington wrote:
Hi Chris,
You have framed the question incorrectly.
That became evident when people
, November 30, 2005 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Syslog] #2, max message size - Need to resolve this
Hi Folks,
We need to resolve this one. I've heard from Rainer and a
very few others. I'd like to hear from more people on this.
Choose one:
__ The maximum message length
)
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 12:15 PM
To: Chris Lonvick (clonvick); [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #2, max message size - Need to resolve this
I vote for a different idea... As in latest syslog-protocol, define
only
the minimum message size the receivers is required to accept
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #2, max message size - Need to resolve this
I agree with Anton's wording and view.
Instead of capping the size maximally that a syslog receiver
is to support, it should be the minimum size that it should support.
Steve
-Original Message-
From
I think there is general agreement to specify minimum msg size, not
maximum msg size in syslog-protocol.
FWIW, I think this is a much better idea.
Darren
___
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
