From: OPSAWG <[email protected]> on behalf of Michael Richardson <[email protected]> Sent: 14 July 2021 18:16
Guy Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > One of the other daemons is journald, which is a syslogd replacement: > https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-journald.service.html > The "systemd" block in pcapng is called the "systemd Journal Export > Block"; it doesn't cover systemd as a whole, it just covers the format > that journald uses to export entries from its log file. The > description of the export block points to the description of the export > format: So to be clear, the "systemd" block is about log file entries which are partially binary. I think that it deserves a document on it's own, regardless of what you might think about systemd. > Do any of those RFCs point to an external specification for most of the > information about the item being discussed, similarly to what's the > case for the systemd Journal Export Block? > Are there any registries that have "less than an RFC and more than a > mailto: URL", i.e. that say more than just "ask this person, hopefully > they're still around, still have that email address, and still remember > what this entry in the registry was all about"? Yes, this is called First Come, First Served. It usually has an Designated Expert that IANA consults. <tp> Not really - see RFC8126 s.4. FCFS is no more than an e-mail. Expert Review is the one that has a Designated Expert with guidelines for the expert provided by the RFC that created the registry. Then there are the ones that require a specification; of any kind, of RFC required, of IETF Review and so on. It is a wide spectrum but there is no IETF Action nor any standards track More than an e-mail less than an RFC sounds like Specification Required or Expert Review, which can be combined if the RFC creating the registry so desires but the terminology needs to be precise and to be understood. There are some WG that are an object lesson in what not to do:-( Tom Petch We haven't proposed any policy yet in section 11.1 of tuexen-opsawg-pcapng, except for defining that 0x8000_0000 to 0xffff_ffff are for local use. (IANA speak is: "PRIVATE USE") We should probably reserve the first 64K for IETF Action (i.e. standards track), 64K to 0x0fff_ffff for Specification Required (not necessarily an RFC) and make the 0x1000_0000 to 0x7fff_ffff as FCFS. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
