> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Sean Conner
> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 9:47 AM
> To: rsyslog-users
> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Last message repeated n times problem
> 
> It was thus said that the Great Rainer Gerhards once stated:
> > >   The format being sent is documented in RFC-3164, in which the
> only
> > > mandatory field is PRI
> >
> > No, not even PRI ;)
> 
>   Yes, you are correct.  I misspoke 8-)
> 
> > > ---it's up the the receiving end to make sense of
> > > the
> > > rest of the message.  It appears that in your case rsyslogd is
> > > mis-interpreting the incoming message.
> >
> > Technically speaking, RFC3164 is not a standard, because it is an
> > informational document. I have elaborated about its implications in:
> >
> > http://www.rsyslog.com/doc-syslog_parsing.html
> >
> > So if we follow your view, we simply need to accept anything as being
> valid,
> > and as such we do never know which information is contained inside a
> message
> > (just ask yourself the question how you know what the sender meant in
> this
> > case. Message is
> >
> > "hostname junk"
> >
> > Was this intended to mean MSG = "hostname junk" or was it intended to
> mean
> > hostname="hostname", MSG="junk" -- or something else?
> 
>   In my own project, I treat it as MSG = "hostname junk" with a
> facility of
> USER and priority of NOTICE (as per section 4.3.3 of RFC-3164).  Also,
> because of the wide variance I've encountered in parsing syslog
> messages,
> when I send out a message, I use the IP address as the hostname (I find
> the
> IP address (either v4 or v6) to be unambigious and easier to find than
> a
> hostname), and anything else in that portion (up to a colon) as the
> program
> name (one exception: anything in square brackets is a process id).

That's the well known approach, which means you do not really interpret the
message. Also, it makes your project unsuitable for NAT environments and
relay chains. This, as a side-note, where some of the reasons why syslog
standardization started. Even 10 years ago, people where quite unsatisfied
with these problems. 
 
> 
>   The entire parser routine is 210 lines of C (including a ton of
> comments)
> and it works enough for my tastes (and if I come across somethign that
> doesn't parse right, I still have the raw log to check against).

%rawmsg%

Rainer
> Adding
> RFC-5424 parsing support would be easy, but I don't have anything
> generating
> RFC-5424 records (well, I suppose my program could relay in RFC-5424
> format
> ... )
> 
>   -spc
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rsyslog mailing list
> http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
> http://www.rsyslog.com
_______________________________________________
rsyslog mailing list
http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
http://www.rsyslog.com

Reply via email to