RE: [Syslog] stream transportwasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Syslog] stream transportwasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
Oh... and, yes, there is prior Art: This spec was openly discussed some
years ago on the loganalysis mailing list. While the text itself can not
be used nowadays, I think it conveys many things that need to be
considered.
http://www.monitorware.com/en/workinprogress/selp.txt
Rainer
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rainer Gerhards [mailto:rgerhards at hq.adiscon.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 11:28 AM
> To: Tom Petch; syslog at ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Syslog] stream
> transportwasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
>
> I agree with Tom that a TCP document would be useful and probably
> needed. Before someone from Huawei comes along and tries to
> patent this,
> too, I volunteer to write this document...
>
> Rainer
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Petch [mailto:nwnetworks at dial.pipex.com]
> > Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:13 AM
> > To: syslog at ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Syslog] stream transport
> > wasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
> >
> > I think that this document has some way to go. It has
> > introduced, and woven
> > together, both TLS and TCP transport, which I think wrong.
> > Ideally, I think
> > that we should have two separate documents, one dealing with
> > TLS, the other with
> > TCP issues; given that both would be short, it is probably
> > sensible to have only
> > the one, but I still see the need for separation within the
> > document. After
> > all, DTLS exists: an outsider could, should, think that
> > syslog is UDP-based,
> > DTLS provides UDP security so DTLS is the obvious choice,
> > what on earth is this
> > document talking about? We need a section on DTLS (if only
> > justifying why it is
> > not for further consideration). And, for me, that alone
> > justifies teasing out
> > the TLS issues from the TCP issues; is FRAME-LEN needed over DTLS?.
> >
> > That said, I do not think that this document adequately
> > covers the TCP issues,
> > ones that have surfaced on the list before.
> >
> > TLSoTCP can deliver one syslog message, many syslog messages,
> > part of a syslog
> > message or a combination thereof - it is in the nature of a
> > stream protocol.
> > This needs spelling out.
> >
> > A TCP connection takes time to set up, TLSoTCP longer. This
> > needs spelling out;
> > if timely delivery is a concern, then the connection should
> > be established in
> > advance.
> >
> > The section on TCP termination is too weak. If we are
> > recommending a timeout,
> > then we should recommend a value, even specifying that it
> > should be configurable
> > over a range. And if we cannot agree on such values, I do
> > not think we should
> > be specifying a timeout.
> >
> > TCP perforce introduces flow control. This will slow down
> > and rate limit
> > messages; what is the impact of this on the application?
> >
> > TCP failures can terminate the connection! Again, this has
> > an impact on the
> > application with the time taken to become aware that the
> > connection has failed.
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David B Harrington" <dbharrington at comcast.net>
> > To: <syslog at ietf.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 4:26 PM
> > Subject: [Syslog] draft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > A new revision of the syslog/TLS draft is available.
> >
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01
> > .txt
> >
> > We need reviewers.
> > Can we get
> > 1) a person to check the grammar?
> > 2) a person to check the syslog technical parts?
> > 3) a person to check compatibility with the other WG documents?
> > 4) a person to check the TLS technical parts?
> >
> > We also need general reviews of the document by multiple people.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David Harrington
> > co-chair, Syslog WG
> > ietfdbh at comcast.net
> > _______________________________________________
> > Syslog mailing list
> > Syslog at lists.ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Syslog mailing list
> > Syslog at lists.ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> Syslog at lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
>
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.