Daniel Wesemann wrote:

 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 >
 > > Actually, it seems kind of silly to use TCP for what is essentially a
 > > connectionless protocol.  We do need reliability, of course, but that
 > > can be taken care of with application-generated ACKs, without a lot of
 > > coding.  We don't need the sequence numbers, sliding windows, or other
 > > traffic shaping features of TCP.  We also don't need to initiate
 > > connections from the destination to the source.
 >
 > Hmm. Ever tried to use the current syslog thru one (or several)
 > firewalls in a high-security environment?
 >
 > > The KIS principle should drive this decision.  Which makes a simpler
 > > protocol?  Which makes a simpler implementation?  Which will speed
 > > syslog2's adoption?  Let's learn from the lessons of SNMPv2 and not
 > > repeat them.
 >
 > KIS is fine. But the one thing that will speed up the adoption is added
 > functionality compared to the existing syslog. And I don't think that
 > simply packing integrity protection into the age-old syslog will do that
 > trick.
 >
 > Cheers,
 > -daniel

hmmm we'll maybe im wrong here, but i was under the impression that
this group was about designing a new logging mechanism (im avoiding
the word protocol on purpose) with security as its main design
goal.
"added functionality" or features are just byproducts.

-ivan

--

"Understanding. A cerebral secretion that enables one having it to know
  a house from a horse by the roof on the house,
  It's nature and laws have been exhaustively expounded by Locke,
  who rode a house, and Kant, who lived in a horse." - Ambrose Bierce

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Iv�n Arce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  Presidente
  CORE SDI S.A.
  Pte. Juan D. Peron 315 4to UF17 (1394) Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  TE/FAX: +54-11-43-31-54-02 +54-11-43-31-54-09
  PGP fingerprint: C7A8 ED85 8D7B 9ADC 6836  B25D 207B E78E 2AD1 F65A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--- For a personal reply use [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to