Hi,
I appreciate the thoughts of everyone on the topics brought up so far.
Let's make sure that we all understand what we can do within the current
scope of the WG.
TIMESTAMP This field may be changed in syslog-sign. We'll have to rev
3195 to accept this after syslog-sign is accepted as an RFC.
non-US-ASCII characters in the payload. This may be addressed in
syslog-sign, or specified in another Internet Draft (which will
be accepted as a WG document if there are enough people
supporting the idea). Just for reference:
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2825.txt
A Tangled Web: Issues of I18N, Domain Names, and the
Other Internet protocols
payload length. It's up to the WG to change this. It may be changed in
syslog-sign if that's the concensus of the WG. In that case,
syslog-sign will have to have dire warnings of trying to push
the new format through old-style (3164) relays or collectors.
We'll have to do that anyway if we change the TIMESTAMP.
payload format. Out of scope. I'll allow discussion on the WG mailing
list (here) but anything coming from that cannot be a document
of this WG. After we accomplish our Charter Goals, we may ask
the ADs to allow the WG to reCharter the WG to address that.
..but not at this time.
I'll ask anyone interested in making changes to any of these to post notes
to the WG list preferably with a suggestion of modifications to the
current IDs, or a suggestion to write a new ID (with the commitment of
being the author. :)
Let's separate these components apart from the discussion topic of a
"light" reliable transport.
Thanks,
Chris
