Hi,
I will try to address David's concern about the complexity
and utility of the MIB.
The basic design principle has been to keep the MIB simple.
It has gone through several iterations, each one making it
simpler than the earlier version :-)
At present the MIB basically allows the NMS to
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 10:17:51AM +0100, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
The only thing that is special with syslog is that under one operating
system (*nix), there is a different architecture with syslogd. It's not
Windows that is different. It is the *nix implementation (at least in my
point of
Hi Juergen,
The only thing that is special with syslog is that under one
operating
system (*nix), there is a different architecture with syslogd. It's
not
Windows that is different. It is the *nix implementation (at least
in
my
point of view). The problem is that *nix is obviously the
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:19:50AM +0100, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
Glenn,
thanks for the description in plain words. At least for me, this is
very useful.
If you think about things that are common to a sufficiently large number
of syslog applications, you can not standardize on many more
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 10:54:54AM +0100, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
I understand this and this is why I offered to write such a paper. But
the question remains if such a description belongs into a normative RFC.
Remember that the current discussion was spawned when David requested
that the
Hi,
[speaking as co-chair]
Finally, we are getting discussion of the issues of what needs to be
modeled by more than two people with opposing ideas.
I would like to reach consensus on this question:
Is it acceptable practice to have more than one syslog application
(sender, receiver, relay)
I agree for the reasons outlined in mails before.
Rainer
-Original Message-
From: David Harrington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 7:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Syslog] MIB Issue #1 - one or multiple? Seeking consensus
Hi,
[speaking as
-Original Message-
From: David Harrington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 10:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Syslog] MIB Issue #1 - one or multiple? Seeking consensus
Hi,
[speaking as co-chair]
Finally, we are getting discussion of the
Anton Okmianski (aokmians) wrote:
The current MIB interface is designed to support multiple
syslog sender or receivers on the same server/host. I believe
this is a valid requirement.
If you agree with this, please say so.
If you disagree with this, please say so.
Agree.
However, I am
