How many syslog sender/receiver implementers would be willing to support such a common format?
How many log anaysis application vendors would like such a common format? or do they consider it unneccesray because they convert incoming info into their own proprietary database formats anyway? dbh > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:24 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Syslog] Small draft for Syslog File Storage? > > Hi all, > > In what we did, we specified the on-the-wire format. However, > we did not > specify any format to use when persisting syslog data to a file. > > Note that we were very generous when specifying the > on-the-wire format, for > example we permit LF, CR, NUL and many other characters > considered dangerous > in file formats. > > There are many tools available which interpret syslog data > stored in text > files. However, different syslog implementations may use > slightly different > file formats. > > Together with the control character issue, the file format > question both has > interoperability AND security issues. I think these would be > very easy to fix > if we write a small RFC that specifies how text is to be > encoded. It would be > similar, but much smaller to RFC4627 (JSON). Actually, I > think we would need > to carry over primarily its section 2.5. > > I would volunteer to write an initial draft, but would first > like to get some > feedback if this effort has any chance of getting through. > > Rainer > _______________________________________________ > Syslog mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
