David,
Thanks for the text. I have done some minor editorial
changes and word-smithing to fit it into the context. It
reads as follows:
For interoperability and backwards compatibility reasons,
the mapping specified in this document between a label
which represents a Facility or a Severity, and the value
which represents the corresponding code, is normative.
So the mapping from a label configured by operators in
syslog.conf or equivalent will consistently map to the
same Facility code regardless of implementation, but
the label itself is often semantically meaningless,
because it is impractical to attempt to enumerate all
possible facilities, and the mapping (label and
corresponding value) that is used for an actual facility
is, and has historically been, implementation-dependent.
For example, the foobar application might log messages
as having come from local7, even though there is no
"local" process on the device, and the operator can
configure syslog.conf to have local7.critical messages
be relayed, even though there might be multiple facilities
using Facility local7. This is typical current practice,
and originators, relays and collectors know how to handle
this situation. For improved accuracy, the foobar
application can also include an APPNAME SDE [RFCPROT]
application.
Let me know if I have missed something. I will put into
the draft and send it off on 14/11/2007.
Glenn
David Harrington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please append the following paragraphs to section 2 "Background", and
> please add these paragraphs to the comment text in the MIB itself that
> describe "Textual Conventions". A reference should be added in the
> section 2 text for the APPNAME SDE with a pointer to the protocol
> document.
>
> "For interoperability and backwards compatibility reasons, the values
> and
> labels are normative, so the mapping from a label configured by
> operators
> in syslog.conf or equivalent consistently maps to the same Facility
> number
> regardless of implementation, but the label itself is often
> semantically
> meaningless, because there are not enough numbers to cover all
> possible
> facilities, and the enumeration (label and value) that is used by an
> actual facility is, and has historically been,
> implementation-dependent.
>
> For example, the foobar application might log messages as having come
> from
> local7, even though there is no "local" process on the device, and the
>
> operator can configure syslog.conf to have local7.critical messages be
>
> relayed, even though there might be multiple facilities using Facility
>
> local7. This is typical current practice, and originators, relays and
>
> collectors know how to handle this situation. For improved accuracy,
> the
> foobar application can also include an APPNAME SDE in the message
> identifying itself as the "foobar" application."
>
> Thanks,
> David Harrington
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> Syslog@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
