Hi Erick (and Charlie),

I agree with you guys. I just fixed it on CVS  and it is going to be
available in the next release and snapshot. I also fixed the maximum
size requirement, which was too small
(32 chars).

*I don't know where my mind was when I made these requirements... :)

Thanks!

--
Daniel B. Cid
dcid ( at ) ossec.net


On 8/25/06, gentuxx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Erick Kinnee wrote:
> Is there a reason for only alpha numerics in an agent name? Here we
> use a format such as this: servicelevel-customer-hostname.
>
> Needless to say, manage_agents doesn't like this. The reason I'd like
> to see dashes allowed is that the name for the agent should match
> it's Nagios name and the name it's known as in our databases. Can we
> get this changed officially?
>

I agree.  The allowable names *should* meet the RFC (for DNS at a
minimum, which allows [a-z0-9-] to be in hostnames).

Erick, can you file a bug for this at http://www.ossec.net/bugs?

- --
gentux
echo "hfouvyyAhnbjm/dpn" | perl -pe 's/(.)/chr(ord($1)-1)/ge'

gentux's gpg fingerprint ==> 5495 0388 67FF 0B89 1239  D840 4CF0 39E2
18D3 4A9E
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFE76vLTPA54hjTSp4RAq6BAKCNqbQxCtC6yylXUPUDjpAZ2Ctl6wCg+ayT
FcTLqNdC1v6UaPDVfzXijd4=
=MYXa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to