Chris,
I conceptually agree with the proposed change.
At the same time, at the risk of duplicating prior comments,
I see this allows for the HOSTNAME to reference a logical
entity which may be a subset or superset of a physical
entity. For example, foo.bar.com may easily refer to a web
: HOSTNAME Field
Chris,
I conceptually agree with the proposed change.
At the same time, at the risk of duplicating prior comments,
I see this allows for the HOSTNAME to reference a logical
entity which may be a subset or superset of a physical
entity. For example, foo.bar.com may easily
Chris,
I conceptually agree with the proposed change.
At the same time, at the risk of duplicating prior comments, I see this
allows for the HOSTNAME to reference a logical entity which may be a subset
or superset of a physical entity. For example, foo.bar.com may easily refer
to a web server
Hi Chris,
I agree with your proposal for the hostname and FQDN. I can't see any
major problems with it.
Regards
Andrew
---vvv--- Proposed change to Section 2.2 ---vvv---
The HOSTNAME field will contain an indication of the originator of
the message in one of four formats: only the
