On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 12:32 -0700, Carson Gaspar wrote:
> Escaping precludes no-configuration backwards compatibility, as no legacy
> syslog-over-tcp code does escaping. So if you want to interoperate with
> existing code, you must have a "don't escape or expect escapes" switch in
> your code. If you're going to do that, just have a "LF mode vs byte-count
> mode" switch. This whole backwards compat argument is bogus, iff we decide
> to escape embedded LF instead of forbidding it. And I have yet to see
> anyone argue for LF on any grounds except backwards compatibility.
As I said in a private mail to you, no we don't need that switch. LF is
escaped as a sequence of two characters '\' and 'n'. This way escaped LF
characters will not affect protocol processing, the only issue is that
LFs in the message will be written to the disk in a slightly different
format. But adding the fact that current TCP senders are not transparent
wrt LFs this is not a big deal.
- old sender - new receiver
=> works, because current syslog-TCP senders strip LFs off the
message, either they replace it with space or forward multiple messages
- new sender - old receiver
=> works, because the old receiver does not care about the "\n"
string in the message, although it will not unescape it when it writes
it to disk
--
Bazsi
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
