Anton & all, in IPv6, we have the "unspecified address", which I think is exactly what we should use in the case an device does actually know nothing about itself (last case in Anton's messsage below) it is "0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0".
Some links: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-address-space http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ios_abcs_ios_the_abcs_ip _version_60900aecd800c111d.html According to RFC 3330 (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3330.txt), I think we can also use "0.0.0.0" for IPv4 addressing in this case. Comments are highly appreciated. Rainer > -----Original Message----- > From: Anton Okmianski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 10:19 PM > To: Rainer Gerhards > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Issue 14: allow unqualified hostname > > Rainer: > > I like Devin's suggestion of recommending a specific preference order: > > FQDN > Static IPv4/IPv6 > Hostname > Dynamic IPv4/IPv6 > "127.0.0.1" (when everything is unknown) > > Maybe the language should be a bit more restrictive than just SHOULDs > and MAYs here. Maybe: "MUST provide FQDN if it is known. If unknown - > static IP. If unknown -- hostname. If unknown - dynamic IP. If > unknown -- (a) can't use syslog or (b) we explain what they should > use." > > I don't know if we decided on the last one. If syslog is to be used > for remote logging only, then requiring knowledge of at least an IP is > acceptable. If, however, we expect it to be used in host-local > scenarios as well, then we need to clarify what they should there when > nothing I known. Devin suggested 127.0.0.1. I like it. Maybe also > allow an IPv6 equivalent of that as well if it exists. > > Thanks, > Anton. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards > > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 11:14 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Issue 14: allow unqualified hostname > > > > > > Hi WG, > > > > this is in regard to issue 14, which talks about allowing the > > unqualified hostname. Based on previous feedback, I think > > this is concensus in the WG (see > > http://www.syslog.cc/ietf/protocol/issue14.htm> l > > for a short > > list). > > > > If nobody objects, I will go ahead and > > edit it in the following way: > > > > Hostname & FQDN SHOULD be used, IP (v4/6) address or "bare" > > hostname MAY be used. > > > > Rainer > > > > > >
