David,
I will happily do that. But before I can, I need to go back to the
discussion on architecture in syslog-protocol. Is this issue solved? Do
we need a new section or are the proposed definition updates enough?
I am asking these questions because I think we need to be clear on the
- Original Message -
From: Glenn M. Keeni [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tom.petch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: David Harrington [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Syslog] MIB Issue #1 - one or multiple? Seeking consensus
tom.petch wrote:
I do
Being not MIB-literate, I tend to agree that it does not add much
complexity if there is a table which most often includes just a single
element.
What is used in practice. It depends on your point of view. If you look
at deployments, a single engine is the vast majority. If you look at
number of
Hi,
[speaking as co-chair]
MIB Issue#1 is not about whether Windows is a real operating system.
If you want to have that discussion feel free, but please do it
elsewhere - it is inappropriate for the syslog WG, and it is certainly
off-topic for MIB Issue#1.
David Harrington
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tom,
Saying that Windows is not an operating system in some key respects because it
doesn't provide the infrastructure that apps need (because it doesn't provide
SNMP support natively) is a little like saying Solaris shouldn't be called a
desktop environment because it doesn't provide Beryl
