Section 1 of RFC2817(Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1) says that special port is not preferable for security. Now the situation is that there is not an IANA allocated TCP port for Syslog. So I think it is reasonable to request a special port for syslog-tls. The disavantage is that we will need another iana allocated port if TCP transport is standardized in the future.
Https is allocated both 443 for tls and 80 for TCP. > -----Original Message----- > From: Miao Fuyou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:34 AM > To: 'Chris Lonvick'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Syslog] Other syslog-tls Issues---Issue0 > > > > I will update the document based on mailing list discussion > if there is no strong objection. > > Let's also disscuss other issues: > > [Issue 0]: Do we need a Syslog TCP port for TLS transport? The > security community had debates about whether using special ports is > desirable. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chris Lonvick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:36 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Framing in syslog messages - > > RE:[Syslog]Preliminarysyslog-transport-tls document - issue 3 > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > This sounds good and I believe that we have had a reasonable > > discussion of > > all of the options. Unless there are strong objections, I'll > > ask Fuyou > > and Yuzhi to incorporate this into their document. > > > > Thanks, > > Chris > > > > On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, Balazs Scheidler wrote: > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Syslog mailing list > [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
