RE: [Syslog] WGLC: draft-ietf-syslog-tc-mib-02
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Syslog] WGLC: draft-ietf-syslog-tc-mib-02
Hi,
the last sentence
"application can also include an APPNAME SDE [RFCPROT]
application." is missing some text from what I proposed.
"application can also include an APPNAME SDE in the message
identifying itself as the "foobar" application."
You can simplify this:
"application can also include an APPNAME Structured Data Element
[RFCPROT]."
dbh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glenn M. Keeni [mailto:glenn at cysols.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 1:41 AM
> To: David Harrington
> Cc: syslog at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Syslog] WGLC: draft-ietf-syslog-tc-mib-02
>
> David,
> Thanks for the text. I have done some minor editorial
> changes and word-smithing to fit it into the context. It
> reads as follows:
>
> For interoperability and backwards compatibility reasons,
> the mapping specified in this document between a label
> which represents a Facility or a Severity, and the value
> which represents the corresponding code, is normative.
> So the mapping from a label configured by operators in
> syslog.conf or equivalent will consistently map to the
> same Facility code regardless of implementation, but
> the label itself is often semantically meaningless,
> because it is impractical to attempt to enumerate all
> possible facilities, and the mapping (label and
> corresponding value) that is used for an actual facility
> is, and has historically been, implementation-dependent.
>
> For example, the foobar application might log messages
> as having come from local7, even though there is no
> "local" process on the device, and the operator can
> configure syslog.conf to have local7.critical messages
> be relayed, even though there might be multiple facilities
> using Facility local7. This is typical current practice,
> and originators, relays and collectors know how to handle
> this situation. For improved accuracy, the foobar
> application can also include an APPNAME SDE [RFCPROT]
> application.
>
> Let me know if I have missed something. I will put into
> the draft and send it off on 14/11/2007.
>
> Glenn
>
> David Harrington wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please append the following paragraphs to section 2
> "Background", and
> > please add these paragraphs to the comment text in the MIB
> itself that
> > describe "Textual Conventions". A reference should be added in the
> > section 2 text for the APPNAME SDE with a pointer to the protocol
> > document.
> >
> > "For interoperability and backwards compatibility reasons,
> the values
> > and
> > labels are normative, so the mapping from a label configured by
> > operators
> > in syslog.conf or equivalent consistently maps to the same
Facility
> > number
> > regardless of implementation, but the label itself is often
> > semantically
> > meaningless, because there are not enough numbers to cover all
> > possible
> > facilities, and the enumeration (label and value) that is
> used by an
> > actual facility is, and has historically been,
> > implementation-dependent.
> >
> > For example, the foobar application might log messages as
> having come
> > from
> > local7, even though there is no "local" process on the
> device, and the
> >
> > operator can configure syslog.conf to have local7.critical
> messages be
> >
> > relayed, even though there might be multiple facilities
> using Facility
> >
> > local7. This is typical current practice, and originators,
> relays and
> >
> > collectors know how to handle this situation. For improved
> accuracy,
> > the
> > foobar application can also include an APPNAME SDE in the message
> > identifying itself as the "foobar" application."
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David Harrington
> > dbharrington at comcast.net
> > 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
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.