David, > > I think this is an very important comment in regard to the overall > > design. I think it is of advantage to facilitate the > creation of other > > transport mappings, as for example is currently being > > discussed for SNMP > > inform messages. > > Where is this discussion taking place? In the syslog WG or in the SNMP > community? As an active member of the SNMP community, I don't > think I'm > aware of this discussion. I am aware of discussions about adding TCP > transport for all types of SNMP messages, not just informs, but that > effort is dying the slow death of apathy.
Sorry, the grammer was not with the non-native speakers among us ;-). What I intended to say was the there is discussion a discussin in the syslog-sec WG on a transport mapping for *syslog* onto snmp inform (actaully trap was written in the orginal thread). Bluntly said "syslog over SNMP". I am refering to this here: http://www.syslog.cc/ietf/autoarc/msg01027.html I am not 100% sure if I expressed it right this time, if I haven't maybe somebody can jump in and find the right words ;) Thanks, Rainer
