Review comments on tcp-01 (as the subject line says:-) What is the intended status? The I-D does not say; I would aim for Standards Track.
s.3 "Traditional TCP implementations do not use any backchannel mechanism " suggest "Traditional implementations of syslog over TCP do not use any backchannel mechanism " "abilities of TCP" suggest "capabilities of TCP" s3.3 I think that the ABNF rules should be amended so that the rule with = comes before the rule with =/ Add at the end " SYSLOG-MSG is defined in the syslog protocol [RFC5424]." A.2 %d10 is LF not NL; I do not know which you mean. And, perhaps the most important, somewhere I think you should cover the nature of TCP; give it a message and it will buffer it, may be for days, and then lose it because the connection is taken down. Should you recommend the use of PSH for all messages? Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Lonvick" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 7:24 PM Subject: [Syslog] Review comments on draft-gerhards-syslog-plain-tcp-01.txt > Hi Folks, > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
