Rainer Gerhards wrote: > I have been a bit brief. MSG is passed in via the POSIX API. So the > actual generator of MSG is not syslogd. However, and you are right on > this, from the "on the wire" IETF point of view, both are generated by > the same entity, that being syslogd. I would like to add that syslogd is one example only. The generator could be a mail application, the authentication module of any application or, any application that anyone chooses to write with the the syslog logging mechanism. It can also be a piece of hardware that is wired to send a certain "syslog message" under some circumstances. On the wire it is a syslog message! There isn't much more to it. So we do have a wide variety of "originators" on hand to fit into the "layered model". That calls for a simple model :-) > > Rainer
Glenn > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rainer Gerhards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 9:59 AM >> To: Glenn M. Keeni; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: [Syslog] draft-ietf-syslog-protocol-21.txt: section >> 3containsnewtext to address ietf last call comments (fwd) >> >>> I agree that it is a point of view. I do not see the necessity of >>> the two layers for MSG and SYSLOG-MSG as a part of operations and >>> management. >>> The reason being that it will generally be the same entity >>> ("application", "module" call it whatever) that will generate MSG > and >>> SYSLOG-MSG. >> Unix *nix, these are always two different entities. >> >> Rainer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Syslog mailing list >> Syslog@lists.ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
