,
-Original Message-
From: Chris Lonvick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:18 PM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] clonvick WGLC Review of
draft-ietf-syslog-sign-20.txt
Hi Rainer,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
Hi,
So
Chris,
-Original Message-
From: Chris Lonvick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 3:37 PM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: APP-NAME, PROCID and MSGID in syslog sign - was: RE: [Syslog]
clonvick WGLC Review of draft-ietf-syslog-sign-20.txt
Hi Rainer,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
Hi,
So far, I have not been able to do a full review. But this triggers my
attention immediately...
Perhaps restructure that as:
A Signature Block message that is compliant with RFC
[14] MUST
contain valid APP-NAME,
Chris,
-Original Message-
From: Chris Lonvick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:18 PM
To: Rainer Gerhards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Syslog] clonvick WGLC Review of
draft-ietf-syslog-sign-20.txt
Hi Rainer,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Rainer
Hi,
So far, I have not been able to do a full review. But this triggers my
attention immediately...
Perhaps restructure that as:
A Signature Block message that is compliant with RFC
[14] MUST
contain valid APP-NAME, PROCID, and MSGID fields.
Specifically, the
value
