, not saying that we have at present.
Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: Rainer Gerhards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Chris Lonvick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:48 PM
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #5 - character encoding (was: Consensus
Of Chris Lonvick
(clonvick)
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 10:22 AM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #5 - character encoding (was: Consensus?)
Hi Rainer,
Why don't we look at it from the other direction? We could state that
any encoding is acceptable
Hi Rainer,
Why don't we look at it from the other direction? We could state that any
encoding is acceptable - for ease-of-use/migration with existing syslog
implementations. It is RECOMMENDED that UTF-8 be used. When it is
used, an SD-ID element will be REQUIRED. e.g. - [enc=utf-8
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Lonvick
(clonvick)
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 10:22 AM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #5 - character encoding (was: Consensus?)
Hi Rainer,
Why don't we look at it from the other direction? We could state that
any
Chris,
I agree to all but one point - only that one quoted here...
Also want to clarify that you suggest that if the message
is in ASCII,
it will not required SD-ID, but for all other encodings,
SD-ID will be
required.
Yes - that's my suggestion.
I am sorry, we can not do this.
Hi Rainer,
I believe that we are saying the same thing. :)
If there is no indicator of encoding or language then a reciever will not
know what it is receiving - just like receivers don't know what they are
receiving today. They MAY make an assumption that it is something in
US-ASCII (but
Chris,
I fully agree - thanks ;)
Rainer
-Original Message-
From: Chris Lonvick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:39 PM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #5 - character encoding (was: Consensus?)
Hi
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #5 - character encoding (was: Consensus?)
Hi Sheran,
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Shyyunn Lin (sheranl) wrote:
Chris:
I think having SD-ID with [enc=utf-8 lang=English] may be a good
approach. If different language use utf-8 encoding, then lang= can
distinguish
(clonvick)
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 10:22 AM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] #5 - character encoding (was: Consensus?)
Hi Rainer,
Why don't we look at it from the other direction? We could state that
any encoding is acceptable - for ease-of-use/migration
