Sam,
I got involved recently because both chairs asked me to submit a draft
to revise 3195 to reflect the work of -protocol-19. I have done so.
And so perhaps you can help me.
The charter calls for a secure transport. The milestones say TLS
(something that could easily be changed without community review, mind
you). A reasonable person could believe that perhaps we might actually
*build* on the work that was already done with SYSLOG/BEEP/TLS. As I'm
relatively new to the party, I'll accept a pointer to the logic of the
choice. There being an IPR claim against the new work, and the fact
that multiple interoperable implementations of a proposed standard that
could easily go to draft exist, I am hoping that pointer explains why
this group is has put aside both interoperability and basic engineering
principles of reuse.
Eliot
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
