Hi,

The chairs have discussed this proposed work with the security and ops
area directors.
The area directors are comfortable with this work being done in the
OPS area, preferably in the OPSAWG WG.

As with any proposal, the WG will need to decide to accept the draft
as a WG draft.
The WG can request an update to the OPSAWG charter. The OPSAWG chairs
will oversee the process.
The WG can decide to submit this for publication as Informational or
standards-track.
The IESG (representing the IETF) can choose which publication status
is appropriate for the document.

dbh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder
> Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 3:24 AM
> To: Rainer Gerhards
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Syslog] documenting industry-standard "plain tcp
syslog"
> 
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 05:59:29PM +0100, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
>  
> > I know this cannot be a WG deliverable under the current 
> charter and I know
> > that we cannot recharter (nor would I like to do so) before 
> we have completed
> > the current items. So I wonder if there is any way to 
> publish such an
> > informational RFC and if there would be support, or at 
> least no objection,
> > from this WG.
> 
> I support having a reference specification how SYSLOG over TCP is
> commonly done. The path forward with an individual ID is fine with
me.
> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
> 

_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

Reply via email to