At 02:48 PM 10/15/00 +0200, Alfonso De Gregorio wrote:
>Hi Everyone,
>
>Add a code set field to the syslog packet format is a useful solution.
>True; this can lead to an incompatibility with some syslog messages
>interpeters; however with some Unicode encodings there will be
>incompatibilities with such packages in any case.
---remainder deleted for brevity---
Hello Alfonso,
Your proposals have merit but they change the observed behaviour of the
syslog protocol message format. The WG was chartered to
- only document the existing protocol,
- provide an authenticated transport to the existing messages, and
- provide an authenticated transport with verifiable delivery to the
existing messages.
This means that we cannot make any changes to the message format.
I'd suggest that you get together with the other folks on the list who
would like to make changes to the syslog format. The selection of a
code set seems to align very well with that. You may want to draft
an informational ID, or you may want to hold a BoF in San Diego.
Thanks,
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
