ces
do support syslog/TCP, but it isn't widely used compared to UDP.
Alex
From: netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen
Sent: Saturday, 10 February 2018 5:42 a.m.
To: t.petch; Clyde Wildes (cwildes); netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] I-D Action: dr
Thank you, Tom. That's an interesting bit of history there. Of course, you
would know, as I see you listed in the Acknowledgments section in RFC 6587.
David Harrington's points are very compelling.
The chairs want to get this draft to Benoit before he steps down. But looking
at the draft ri
Hi Clyde.
> I will remove TLS if that is the preference of the chair and the working
> group.
We'd have to ask the WG, since it's not a chair or shepherd decision. If
you're okay leaving it in, and dealing with the fallout later, and no one
objects, then I'm fine leaving TLS in.
> RFC 6587
Kent,
I will remove TLS if that is the preference of the chair and the working group.
RFC 6587 can be made Informational.
Working with an editor might help to avoid additional revisions.
Unless I hear otherwise I will post another update on Friday with TLS, and its
references, removed as well
Hi Clyde,
The chairs were discussing the HISTORIC reference to RFC 6587. As we
understand it, RFC 6587 was actually originally published as a HISTORIC
document to accommodate Security area concerns. Apparently, Benoit was AD at
the time, so he may recall. The IETF took special effort to pub
Kent
My request for a reference for Posix hs been fixed in -19.
Tom Petch
- Original Message -
From: "Kent Watsen"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 4:59 PM
> Clyde,
>
> This draft still isn't passing idnits. I provided the link to idnits
previously, but here it is again: https://w
, 2018 1:46 PM
> To: Benoit Claise ; Kent Watsen
> ; netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-19.txt
>
> By the same reasoning surely UDP should not be available either, because it
> also doesn't provide security.
>
Hi Clyde,
One quick follow-up, it seems that all drafts are moving over to reference the
tree-diagrams draft these days. As such, I think Section 1.3 (Tree Diagram
Notation) should now be removed and Section 3.1 should change as follows:
OLD
Please see Section 1.3 for tree diagram notation
alf Of Alex
> Campbell
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 1:46 PM
> To: Benoit Claise ; Kent Watsen
> ; netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-19.txt
>
> By the same reasoning surely UDP should not be available either, because it
] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-19.txt
Hi,
>
>** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic RFC: RFC 6587
>
> Kent: hmmm, what's going on here? This YANG module is providing an ability
> to configure the "tcp" transport, even though the IESG made that ab
Hi,
** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic RFC: RFC 6587
Kent: hmmm, what's going on here? This YANG module is providing an ability to configure
the "tcp" transport, even though the IESG made that ability historic in 2012
(see IESG Note below). Searching online, it looks like Cis
Clyde,
This draft still isn't passing idnits. I provided the link to idnits
previously, but here it is again: https://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits. Below is
the idnits output for -19 with inlined comments.
PS: I didn't also checked the other issues we're tracking, but will when we get
past thes
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Network Modeling WG of the IETF.
Title : A YANG Data Model for Syslog Configuration
Authors : Clyde Wildes
Kiran Koushik
13 matches
Mail list logo
