---- Original Message ----- From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <[email protected]> To: "tom.petch" <[email protected]> Cc: "Anton Okmyanskiy (aokmians)" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:46 PM Subject: Re: [Syslog] Please review draft-ietf-syslog-dtls-01
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 02:53:02PM +0100, tom.petch wrote: > > > We have a delicate juggling act here, that syslog over TLS is the > > IESG-mandated solution, because it provides flow control, and so we > > cannot be too critical of it, yet need to criticise it in order to > > justify the existence of sylog over DTLS. > > You do not have to 'criticize' SYSLOG over TLS/TCP - there will be > situations where there simply is no TCP, see 6lowpan et al. The best > thing is to concentrate on defining how SYSLOG over DTLS works and to > leave out any discussion about 'shortcomings' of TLS/TCP or how to > choose the best SYSLOG transport for a given network for future > documents. I see many I-Ds criticised for failing to say why they should exist. The limitations of TCP and the attractions of UDP justify this I-D so I regard those preliminary paragraphs as a necessary part of this I-D. Ir might be called an applicability statement. Tom Petch > > /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
