Hi Folks,
I've been trying to get the IETF people to set up a WG mailing list for us
to replace the one on employees.org. I believe that I've sent them all of
the information but I havn't heard back from them in a few weeks.
However, it appears that employees.org has gotten a new lease on life an
Hi Folks,
It was brought to my attention that spam has been making its way through
the new list on employees.org. :-( I've changed things back to the way
they were before the latest change. I'm now manually approving all
messages again. -sigh- That's really not what I want but I really don't
Hi,
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:36:37 -0600
From: Jean-Francois Mule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Chris Lonvick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Syslog-sec] what is the status of syslog dev
Hi Folks,
Things are looking close to complete for syslog-protocol and
syslog-transport-udp. Please review these documents and send your
comments to the WG list.
Our web page has the links to the documents:
http://www.employees.org/~lonvick/index.shtml
But so that you can jump right in:
- s
Hi All,
Do we have rough consensus on this? We can still request a slot at the
upcoming IETF to discuss this.
Thanks,
Chris
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
> Anton:
>
> I understand the source of the 480 byte limit you outlined in
> -transport. Even though we have now decided that
Hi,
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, David B Harrington wrote:
> Hi Anton,
>
> I think you'll find the IESG will expect the WG to select one
> transport as the interoperability baseline for the standard.
I'm certain so as well.
> I could of course be wrong, so I suggest the area directors be
> consulted to
Hi Folks,
We're getting very near to completion of the two base IDs. :)
Anton has updated the syslog transport ID and it may be found here:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-syslog-transport-udp-03.txt
Rainer has also updated the syslog protocol ID and it may be found here:
http://
Hi Folks,
We're concentrating on getting syslog-protocol and syslog-transport-udp
out right now. I've been in touch with the authors of those documents and
neither of them can travel to Minneapolis for IETF 62. From that, I don't
see much point in scheduling a meeting.
Rainer has received Sharo
Hi Folks,
We have received a liaison letter from the Optical Internetworking Forum
http://www.oiforum.com/
I've asked that it be posted to the IETF Liaison Statement page but until
that happens, I've placed a copy on our Additional WG page:
http://www.employees.org/~lonvick/index.shtml
Cover
Hi Albert,
We're pushing to get syslog-protocol and syslog-transport-udp out before
we finalize syslog-sign. It is still in our Charter to do that. I'll
ask Jon to update it so it won't expire.
Thanks,
Chris
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Albert Mietus wrote:
> Question:
>
> Will there ever be an "sy
Hi Everyone,
I've been glad to see all of the discussion on the mailing list about
these documents over the past few weeks. I believe that it shows that we
have received sufficient review of these documents.
I've been travelling a lot recently and havn't been able to keep up fully
with everythin
Hi MC,
On Wed, 18 May 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sorry for that but I have to insist. Could anyone please have have a look
> on that issue?
>
> I really need to know how IETF interpret RFC 3195:
> Are Syslog Cooked messages allowed to be longer than 1024 characters?
> I have read RFC 3195 an
ach of these IDs, please replace
all references to "RFC-protocol" with the RFC number of
draft-ietf-syslog-protocol ID. Please remove this section after
editing.
12. Working Group
The working group can be contacted via the mailing list:
syslog-sec@employe
Hi Folks,
I've been busy for the past few weeks but it looks like we have consensus
on open issues. I'm going to ask Rainer to add in the final few changes
and post syslog-protocol to the ID repository. Once that's in there, I'll
ask for a WG Last Call. If no major issues are found with syslog-
Hi Folks,
I've done a review of draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-13 and have the following
comments. I'd like to ask Rainer to incorporate them along with any other
final comments and publish a new version. Once this is in the ID
repository I will call for WG Last Call for two weeks. If we don't get
Hi Folks,
My review comments of draft-ietf-syslog-transport-udp-04.txt. I'll ask
Anton to address them and submit a new ID. Once that's in we can move
into WG Last Call.
Thanks,
Chris
===
The dates need updating. Copyright should be dated 2005.
Spaces are needed before the reference brack
Hi Anton,
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Anton Okmianski (aokmians) wrote:
> Chris:
>
> Thanks for feedback. Attached is the latest draft for final review by the
> group before I send it out officially. One follow up question below...
>
>
> > Section 2 "One Message Per Datagram" contains:
> >Each sys
Hi Rainer,
I've snipped much of your posting and answered questions below.
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
> >
> > Would it be appropriate in Section 6.2.1 "VERSION" to describe that
> > the VERSION field can only be changed by STANDARDS ACTIONS as defined
> > in RFC 2434? Also, th
Hi Sharon,
Unfortunately I won't be able to get to Paris this year. I asked for a
volunteer to chair the meeting but havn't heard from anyone.
(hint, hint :)
Thanks,
Chris
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Sharon Chisholm wrote:
> hi
>
> Will there be a syslog meeting in Paris?
>
> It might be a good way t
Hi Folks,
Are there agenda items for a meeting in Paris?
Please get them in quickly and let's see if we
want to hold a meeting.
Many thanks,
Chris
___
Syslog-sec mailing list
Syslog-sec@www.employees.org
http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-
Hi Folks,
I'd like to thank Sharon for volunteering but I don't think that we have
items to discuss for syslog-protocol and syslog-transport-udp at the Paris
meeting. Let's focus on getting those to the IESG.
We'll next focus on syslog-sign and 3195bis.
Thanks,
Chris
___
Hi Folks,
This message marks the start of a Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-14.txt, "The syslog Protocol", for publication
as an Proposed Standard. This last call period expires on August 5th,
2005 (extended to the end of the IETF meeting week).
During this Last Call period
Hi Folks,
This message marks the start of a Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-syslog-transport-udp-05.txt, "Transmission of syslog messages
over UDP", for publication as an Proposed Standard. This last call period
expires on August 5th, 2005 (extended to the end of the IETF meeting
week).
Du
Security ADs,
Having passed a WG Last Call, draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-14.txt is ready
for AD review.
[Area] SECURITY
[WG] syslog
[I-D] draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-14.txt
[Qver] draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-05.txt
[Shep] Chris Lonvick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The WG last call
Security ADs,
Having passed a WG Last Call, draft-ietf-syslog-transport-udp-05.txt is
ready for AD review.
[Area] SECURITY
[WG] syslog
[I-D] draft-ietf-syslog-transport-udp-05.txt
[Qver] draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-05.txt
[Shep] Chris Lonvick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The W
Hi Folks,
I've asked Marshall Rose and Darren New to update RFC 3195 with respect to
syslog-protocol. There are some implementations of RAW but I need to ask
if anyone either has an implementation of COOKED, or is planning on doing
an implementation of COOKED? If so, then your comments on the do
Hi Folks,
I'm going to schedule a meeting for Vancouver.
(1)
Let's start an email discussion of the topics Sam brought up about
syslog-protocol. I'd like to get resolution to all items in Vancouver.
(2)
It sounds like there is a healthy discussion going on in the IETF
Discussion list abo
Hi,
Let's coordinate our discussions on these issues. We can keep Sam out of
these discussions until we get our responses together. I'll put out notes
to the list on each issue and we can see how we want to address each.
Thanks,
Chris
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
Dear Sam
Hi Rainer,
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
3) Backward compatibility and versioning are not really discussed.
You define semantics of the version field but these semantics
require the sender to be configured with the version that the
receiver will support. Is this extensib
Hi Again,
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
5) I don't think x- as a prefix is such a good idea for vendor use SD.
It seems like that some way of identifying the vendor would be
better; possibly something based on OIDs, enterprise numbers, or
domain names. The problem with a
Hi Folks,
I'd like to poll the group and see who is implementing, or is going to
implement, syslog-protocol.
Thanks,
Chris
___
Syslog-sec mailing list
Syslog-sec@www.employees.org
http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec
Hi David,
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, David B Harrington wrote:
Hi,
Because I believe we should be working to integrate our network
management standards, at least to the point they can secure and
correlate data easily across NM interfaces, I would like to see the
approach adopted by syslog to be simi
Hi Folks,
Sorry for the interruption. employees.org seems to be having some
problems. I've just subscribed everyone to the "syslog" mailing list on
the IETF servers. I'm going to enable moderation of the
syslog-sec@employees.org list and watch that to make sure that the
discussion moves ov
33 matches
Mail list logo
