Hi Glen, I don't mind if you ask this WG for input on your ID. However, our charter won't allow it to become a document of this Working Group. The same goes for any other proposal related to the formatting of the payload of syslog messages.
All: Glen would like to get this ID through the process so it may become an RFC. Having it reviewed by like-minded people helps that process. If you have time+effort, please send comments either to the list or to Glen. Thanks, Chris On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Marshall Glen wrote: > > Relative to syslog payload format, that may be partly a function of > application domains. I'll call your attention to a draft I posted at the > beginning of this month: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-marshall-security-audit-00.txt > > Conceptually, this defines what could be a security audit payload for RFC > 3195 in the healthcare application domain. > > Best, > Glen F. Marshall > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Lonvick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 17:41 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: What Can Be Changed in syslog > > > 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 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Medical Solutions > Health Services Corporation and are intended only for the addressee(s). > The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or > otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, > copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may > be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe > you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and > notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you > >
