Hi,
Rainer has it right. I agree that a simple note as Rainer suggests will
do it.
Thanks,
Chris
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
David,
I went through my notes. Retaining PRI as is is actually a charter item:
---
Reviews have shown that there are very few similarities between
David,
I went through my notes. Retaining PRI as is is actually a charter item:
---
Reviews have shown that there are very few similarities between the
message formats generated by heterogeneous systems. In fact, the only
consistent commonality between messages is that all of them contain
the at
- Original Message -
From: "Rainer Gerhards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "David Harrington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:31 PM
Subject: RE: [Syslog] severity
> -Original Message-
> Fro
> -Original Message-
> From: David Harrington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Syslog] severity
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't think -protocol- spelled out the restriction clearly that
&
Hi,
I don't think -protocol- spelled out the restriction clearly that
severity could only be 0-7. The document states that the 0-7
severities listed were not normative.
Now that Rainer pointed this out, I do realize that an implementer of
the PRI calculation code might recognize that the PRI cal
