1999-10-20-14:08:30 antirez: > 1999-10-20-13:26:04 Bennett Todd: > > Naturally TCP is the big first step. It may be the only fundamental change > > needed for all I know. > > I think (hope) it's possible to reach our goals even using UDP. Why to use > TCP if strong auth it's possible even using UDP? Also in a lot of case auth > and cryptografy isn't needed with some hosts so a 'modular' protocol may be > a good choice. I'd certainly hope that whatever implementation we end up offering can support backward-compatible operation with classic syslogs in UDP. But for a high-performance, reliable delivery, it'd be kinda silly trying to do it with UDP; all the problems that we'd have to solve (resending in response to lost packets, but as much as possible not in response to delayed packets, regulating transmission speed to avoid overrunning routers in the middle) have been solved by TCP. Why use TCP? So you can get the best possible performance while reliably delivering the logging content. -Bennett
