>>>> - Possibility to use this protocol on a serial cable: We have a
>>>> machine with eight serial ports and no network connection [...]
>>> This is an implementation issue IMHO.
>> Not really. The protocol should be able to work [over a single
>> unadorned octet stream].
> You're confused about what you're using your serial device as.
> Unless you are using "custom software" with syslogd, your serial
> devices are being treated as storage devices by syslogd, not remote
> syslog daemons.
At present, yes. And as I read it, that's what this person wants to
change: the desire is to use those serial lines to carry not what
syslogd wants to write to logfiles, but rather syslog-to-syslog
protocol. This is not possible unless the protocol - which is what
we're charged with designing - depends on nothing but a single octet
stream.
> If you want to continue using serial devicse for syslog stuff, I'd
> suggest piping syslog messages into gzip and sending gzip output down
> your serial lines.
I wouldn't. gzip introduces huge latency issues, not to mention very
poor error tolerance. gzip with hacks to flush a partial block after a
(fairly short) timeout, plus something to add on ECC bits...then, yeah,
maybe. But if I were in the situation sketched above, I'd much prefer
plain syslog-to-syslog protocol over those serial lines.
der Mouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
