At 08:44 PM 10/20/1999 +0200, you wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 09:28:52AM -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
>> Chris Calabrese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Under Linux, syslog has a maximum of 24 facility names & codes...
>>
>> I'd rather see a fixed number of facilities and priorities. Otherwise you
>> risk balkanization. For example: you often can't copy a syslog.conf from
>> solaris to freebsd, or from freebsd to linux. This is a scenario to be
>> avoided.
>
>But the solution is not to disallow extensible set of facilities. As more
>and more services are run by hosts, more facilities may exist in time.
...
>The _BIG_ problem with the current protocol is that fields are not fully
>defined. (which fields to include, what their format is etc.) And a second
>problem is that it's hard to extend.
Check out <ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-abela-ulm-05.txt> for
an alternative syslog message syntax that is extensible. Let's see if that
wheel is round enough before we reinvent the flat tire.
Bob
