Re: [rsyslog] Does rsyslog really need to start after basic.target on systemd ?

On 04/02/2016 09:14 AM, Francis Moreau wrote: On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 10:50 PM, David Lang wrote: The trouble is that it depends a lot on exactly what you have rsyslog configured to do. Since rsyslog can send logs over the network, to databases, etc, there are potentially a lot

Re: [rsyslog] Does rsyslog really need to start after basic.target on systemd ?

Hi, Francis Moreau wrote: > So I don't really see why it's an issue to start rsyslog earlier since > it must already handle the case where those requirements are not ready > to work. Don't forget setups where people specify IP addresses rsyslog should bind to. These interfaces must be ready to

[rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

Hi guys I'm highly interested in the lookup table feature described in http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/lookup_tables.html >From the git and some earlier posts on this list it seems to be mostly done, right? Is there an ETA when it will officially be supported? And for testing purposes, could I build

Re: [rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

It is part of 8.17, only flagged as experimental. So you should be good in using it. Sent from phone, thus brief. Am 04.04.2016 15:32 schrieb "Christian Ramseyer" : > Hi guys > > I'm highly interested in the lookup table feature described in >

Re: [rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

Great thanks Rainer, I'll check it out. On 04/04/16 15:38, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > It is part of 8.17, only flagged as experimental. So you should be good in > using it. > ___ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog

Re: [rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

The actual implementation details deviate from proposal page at times. It's best to use documentation. At a high level, proposal describes it quite accurately though. On Apr 4, 2016 7:23 PM, "Christian Ramseyer" wrote: > Great thanks Rainer, I'll check it out. > > > On

Re: [rsyslog] Certificate usage

> From: "David Lang" > Date: 04/04/16 14:56 > rsyslog just uses whatever gnutls does by default. It doesn't try to be > fancy, > it just does a minimal wrapper around it's normal communications. The background to this is the observance of the NSA NIAP requirements when

Re: [rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

On 04/04/16 21:48, singh.janmejay wrote: > The actual implementation details deviate from proposal page at times. It's > best to use documentation. Sorry could you post a link to said documentation? At a first glance I can only find

[rsyslog] Certificate usage

Hello, In using certificates for secure remote syslogging, does rsyslog take into account the certificates's Extended Key Usage ? For instance, in this case rsyslog is a client.  The certificate used would have the Extended Key usage field set to serverAuth. If the certificate does not have

Re: [rsyslog] Certificate usage

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, jonetsu wrote: Hello, In using certificates for secure remote syslogging, does rsyslog take into account the certificates's Extended Key Usage ? For instance, in this case rsyslog is a client.  The certificate used would have the Extended Key usage field set to

Re: [rsyslog] Certificate usage

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, jonetsu wrote: From: "David Lang" Date: 04/04/16 14:56 rsyslog just uses whatever gnutls does by default. It doesn't try to be fancy, it just does a minimal wrapper around it's normal communications. The background to this is the observance of the NSA

Re: [rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

This page is the best starting point for all things configuration: http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/index.html On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:58 AM, singh.janmejay wrote: > http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/lookup_tables.html > > I think

Re: [rsyslog] State of Lookup Tables Implementation

http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/lookup_tables.html I think something went wrong with that link, we need to clean-up. On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Christian Ramseyer wrote: > On 04/04/16 21:48, singh.janmejay wrote: >> The actual implementation details