Hi Rainer,
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
Chris,
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Lonvick
Are you volunteering to write? :)
I think we are not yet in a position we have something to write. I know
that you probably did not mean to start anything right now, but let me
use this message as a tool to voice my concerns.
Over the past months (years), we've done some good work in evolving
syslog. However, RFC 3195 is having a very hard time among implementors
and our last efforts on protocol have received very limited feedback
from the operator/end user camp. On the other hand, I know that there
*is* vital interest in syslog. It's easy to judge this by the interest
new implementations receive from the user base and also by the number of
deployments of syslog tools. Obviously, end-users tend to be interested
more in the actual software tools than in protocols.
But the low implementor participation and end-user adoption rate is
raising a very important question to me: are we still heading into the
right direction? What does it help if we create better and better
standards (assumed they are, which is obviously arguable) but nobody
cares? In practice, mostly non-official-standard solutions are being
asked form, developed and deployed. For example, I will begin to
implement plain tcp syslog with ssl encryption shortly. Not because it
is so secure or reliable - simply because there is so much demand for
it. Current approaches typically use plain tcp syslog together with
stunnel (which, by the way, is valid solution for many needs).
May be it is just me feeling some asynchronicity between what the field
is asking for and what we are doing.
If so, I would suggest that we try to obtain some broader feedback from
operators and implementors before going any further with new standards.
If there is a sufficiently large group of operators (maybe "just" in
terms of purchasing power) asking for some new protocol (or protocol
versions), we can probably make the implementors implement them.
Currently, I honestly feel it very hard to provide business reasoning
for creating something new...
Very good points. I've gotten a few separate emails asking if this is the
right direction. I'll raise this discussion in a new thread on the
mailing list.
Thanks,
Chris
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
