Hi,
There does seem to be some conflicts in the section; if it SHOULD start
with 1 and increment by 1 then how do we get to SnmpEngineReboots?
PROPOSED:
===
4.2.2. Reboot Session ID
The Reboot Session ID is a decimal value that has a length between 1
and 10 octets. The acceptable values for this are between 0 and
9999999999. Leading zeroes MUST be omitted.
A Reboot Session ID is expected to increase whenever an originator
reboots in order to allow collectors to distinguish messages and
message signatures across reboots. There are several ways in which
this may be accomplished. In one way, the Reboot Session ID may
increase by 1, starting with a value of 1. Note that in this case, an
originator is required to retain the previous Reboot Session ID across
reboots. In another way, a value of the unix time (number of seconds
since 1 January 1970 [reference?] may be used. In yet another way,
implementors wish to consider using the snmpEngineBoots value as a
source for this counter as defined in [RFC3414].
In cases where an originator is not able to guarantee that the Reboot
Session ID is always increased after a reboot, the Reboot Session ID
MUST always be set to a value of 0. If the value can no longer be
increased (e.g., because it reaches 9999999999), then manual
intervention may be required to subsequently reset it.
If a reboot of an originator takes place, Signature Block messages
MAY use a new PROCID. However, Signature Block messages of the same
originator MUST continue to use the same APP-NAME and MSGID.
===
Does this work for everyone?
Thanks,
Chris
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, [email protected] wrote:
Hi Alex,
By "timestamp", at least I've meant "POSIX timestamp (seconds since
1/1/1970) when the syslog daemon started". But even with the new
text, I'm still having trouble determining whether this would be
an acceptable value for RSID...
Best regards,
Pasi
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ext Alexander
Clemm (alex)
Sent: 22 March, 2009 19:06
To: Martin Schütte; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Syslog] Syslog-sign: Last minor clarifications/nits
Hello Martin,
I have clarified in the text that what I think it is you are
suggesting will be allowed. But it is not a time stamp. A time
stamp would be something like 2008-10-16T20:23:03+02:00.
While it still suggests that the RSID should increase by 1, it is
not required. It is merely required to simply increase (no problem
with an RSID reflecting a "time stamp"), unless it is set to 0.
Here is what the section in question reads now:
The Reboot Session ID is a decimal value that has a length
between 1 and 10 octets. The acceptable values for this are
between 0 and 9999999999. Leading zeroes MUST be omitted.
A Reboot Session ID is expected to increase whenever an originator
reboots in order to allow collectors to distinguish messages and
message signatures across reboots. The Reboot Session ID SHOULD
increase by 1, starting with a value of 1. Note that in this case,
an originator is required to retain the previous Reboot Session ID
across reboots.
In cases where an originator is not able to guarantee that the
Reboot Session ID is always increased after a reboot, the Reboot
Session ID MUST always be set to a value of 0. If the value can
no longer be increased (e.g., because it reaches 9999999999),
then manual intervention may be required to subsequently reset
it. Implementors MAY wish to consider using the snmpEngineBoots
value as a source for this counter as defined in [RFC3414].
Does this accommodate your concern?
--- Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Schütte
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 1:15 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Syslog] Syslog-sign: Last minor clarifications/nits
Alexander Clemm (alex) schrieb:
On the first item, yes, the first item (RSID) is clearly a
counter; a
time stamp cannot be used, nor can a value that is arbitrarily
generated.
To use a time stamp would require a parameter that is differently
defined than the current RSID.
Excuse my persistance here, but: why?
Especially if they do not have to be sequential.
Is there any reason to define RSID as a counter instead of an
increasing
ID? When is a counter like 1-2-5-6 better than IDs like
1234400000-1234500000-1234600000-12374700000?
--
Martin
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
