> Hi WG, > > in order to provide feedback to Sam, I would like to know what you > current view of syslog-protocol is. I am asking especially those people > that objected it in the meeting. Please share your concerns with us, > because only this allows us to drive that thing forward. I have > absolutely no problem with changes, but we need to know that people > think there is need to change. > > So, please let the WG know any concerns you might have with > syslog-protocol and/or the work we have carried out so far.
I've been asleep on here and not reading the drafts for too long. syslog-protocol is trying to do bit-banging it text, a-la "RAW" from 3195. This leads me to believe that the protocol is badly designed. Looking at it, it seems to be a cross between COOKED and RAW mode from 3195. Maybe the fault of this is this "structured data" that seems to be pervasive in the IETF at present. What you might call a poor man's XML. Darren _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
