> > I questioned the need for a version number for the TLS transport in 
> > private conversation and now I bring this up again here.
> 
> Was that private? I thought it was on-list. Anyhow... I 

The public messege can be found at:
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/syslog/current/msg01273.html

It seems there was a rough concensus that the version number was welcomed to
save port resource when we discussed this issue on the mailing list. That is
the reason why a version number is there. 


> > This does not at all sound very convincing to me (and I assume what 
> > the author wanted to say is not well said because I believe the 
> > trigger for not trying again would be a close after sending 
> the first 
> > syslog message and not after the successful TLS handshake).
> 
> I, too, assume this was meant...

Yeah, this sentence should be improved if version number is kept there. 

> 
> 
> But my suggestion is to remove the version as well as this text.
> 

So do I now...



_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

Reply via email to