As party to the original consensus, as reflected in -15, I know of nothing new that causes me to want to change anything.
I note too that there is support for something in this area in netconf (amongst other application protocols), where the issue is less acute since the protocol is duplex. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rainer Gerhards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Darren Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 9:42 AM Subject: RE: [Syslog] #2, max message size Darren, > The only place a message size limit should be specified is in > a transport > mapping. If it's in -15 then it should be removed. Limits > of all sizes > and types do nothing but contribute to aging of a protocol. -protocol-15 is a compromise after a very long discussion. It says: ----- A receiver MUST be able to accept messages up to and including 480 octets in length. For interoperability reasons, all receiver implementations SHOULD be able to accept messages up to and including 2,048 octets in length. If a receiver receives a message with a length larger than 2,048 octets, or larger than it supports, the receiver MAY discard the message or truncate the payload. ----- I think this text is useful. It keeps the door open for any size messages while still allowing it to be restricted by the transport mappings and individual implementations (e.g. on low-end embedded devices). It cautions implementors against being too verbose but also sets a lower limit that each implementation can assume to be received. I think we should continue to use this text. Do you agree? Rainer _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
