At 08:53 PM 10/20/1999 +0200, you wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 02:11:55PM -0300, Emiliano Kargieman wrote:
>> a good idea, given that we don't end
>> up with an HTTP-like protocol that opens a TCP connection for every little
>> 100byte packet. The overhead is just too much. I'd rather go for keeping
>> one single TCP connection open for each host we are logging to.
...
>With this I _dont_ want to maintain that UDP is better than TCP for
>syslog2, simply I think that to choose TCP without a deep analysis may
>be an error. So since seems that both UDP and TCP have some advantages
>a good solution may be to design a protocol that can be simply implemented
>using both TCP and UDP.
I agree. Make the core functionality work on UDP as a universal transport
and it will also work over TCP. Also allow options which require a TCP
connection to work properly, but don't make them part of the baseline
requirements if that can be avoided.
Bob
