--On Friday, October 27, 2000 3:15 PM -0500 "Chris M. Lonvick"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should they have one "global" counter on the box and then "secondary"
> counters for each output? ..or should they just have a counter
> associated with each output queue?
Just one counter per output queue. I see no reason to tell third parties
how many messages they aren't being sent, and many resons not to. Besides,
what purpose would a global counter serve? The only purpose for counters at
all is sequencing, and why do you care about the sequence of things you're
never sent?
There is one edge condition to worry about: 2 different queues to the same
destination host. I say we specify that this be illegal over-the-wire, and
that implementations should detect this configuration and merge the queues.
To illustrate the problem in old syslog format:
mail.crit @host1
lpr.debug @host1
should become, internally:
mail.crit,lpr.debug @host1
--
Carson Gaspar - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Queen trapped in a butch body
