Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ferenc Wagner wrote: > >> The Debian changelog for version 2.0.2-2 says you removed this module >> intentionally, but didn't it get useful since then? > > do you actually use and need support for RFC 3195 style of logging. > According to rsyslog upstream, this "standard" is more or less stalled > atm. and the support in rsyslog is untested.
Hi Michael, Yes, I now this standard isn't mature (to say the least), but Cisco advertises support for it, and network people around here got interested. So we are (or rather would like to be) in a testing phase. If you guarrantee it doesn't work, then we don't need RFC 3195. :) On the other hand, if it almost worked, we could more easily test and possibly even fix it up if it was packaged. > So I'm reluctant to enable support for it. In addition, it would > require the packaging of a separate library called "liblogging", > which im3195 requires. Yes, but that sounds like a good idea anyway. :) Joking aside, the latest news entry is from 2005, which suggests it wouldn't be too hard to follow upstream development... It sure is stalled, but now that Cisco jumped the boat, maybe there's some chance for a change. If there's promise, perhaps I can even lend you a hand with packaging liblogging. > Another alternative is RELP and the new TLS support in upcoming rsylog > releases, where I'm already working on (on hold because of the lenny > release). > Would RELP or TLS support suffice your needs? Mines yes, certainly, I don't manage routers. But it wouldn't help my colleagues. -- Cheers, Feri. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
