> I think that the internationlization is yet another last nail in the
> coffin of UDP syslog.
> Its just Really Time To Move On.
> [...] TCP syslog is workable, practical and effective.
> There is just no more room [..] UDP syslog
I don't agree!
UDP syslog is fine in a lot of cases.
The question is where internationlization is always a good case. I don't thinks so
Yes, it is needed for "user applications, no we don't need it in technical
complex systems!
E.g. a Unix-kernel, of the RT core of a router is will be written in
"englisch-C" there is no need for i18n. Often, there will be no room for ir either.
However, it's need logging. UPD-syslog will do fine!
My idea is to think about "syslog" as a concept, without (hard) limit's. It is
a header with a prio, a timestamp etc and "a short line of message".
With UDP syslog, the line is upto 1K (Biut face it, I hardly see line abouve 80
chars. So with i18n, 3 thime 80 will fit.
TCP syslog, syslog-"whatever" doesn;'t need to inherite that limit. Just the
concept. But that doesn't mean UDP-syslog can't bee used any more!
ALbert Mietus
Send prive mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send business mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don't send spam mail!
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
