> Darren, > > > > > Also, if we are to transport syslog over TCP at some stage, > > > > we need to keep > > > > a delimiter character free from use in the message. Again, a > > > > LF would be a > > > > good choice for this delimiter. > > > > > > Here, I disagree. I think we can not set aside a character > > for this. If > > > we go for TCP, let's do octet-couting. Its reliable, efficient and > > > proven. Anyhow, we are not yet doing a TCP mapping, so I > > suggest we save > > > this discussion until later. > > > > Why not use LF? > > Because we - the WG!!!! - have said we want to have the full character > set available in the message. Search the archive. Read the drafts. I am > tired of doing (re)search for you. I have better things to do than to > support your lazyness.
I don't see why having a full character set available in a message means that you can't chose to select a particular character for an EOR marker. Protocols everywhere use special characters for this or that yet there are no restrictions on what messages they convey. Maybe I'm confusing implementation detail with protocol specification by asking for LF be used as a EOR marker. So, you're right, we shouldn't set aside any particular character to mean EOR in syslog-protocol, that should be left up to the construction of syslog over each protocol. Do you agree on that? > My preference is to finish *this* work. It doesn't help to restart this > discussion. May I provide a quote from Marshall T. Rose in a similar > situation in this WG: Marshall T Rose is responsible for 3195 and that could be considered to be a failure by many. > How about you and your experience and affiliation? I was the focal point of a lot of people wanting to do work on the syslog protocol before the WG formed. At the first syslog IETF BOF I gave a small presentation on the work I'd done to implement syslog over TCP, including using SSL as the transport with the transfer of hashes and storing them on disk. At the first BOF there was a large room full of a lot of people, a far cry from the numbers in Vancouver. The syslog replacement I wrote over 5 years ago was the basis of the work that has resulted in syslog-ng for Linux, even though today it no longer even closely resembles what I did originally. I, like many I suspect, became disenchanted with the direction of the group when it started to go down the road that led to 3195 and I just lost interest for a long time because I did not have the energy to put into fighitng it. In this group, I represent myself. Darren _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
