On Aug 19, 2014, at 6:33 PM, David Lang <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Aug 2014, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> On Aug 15, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Mike Hoskins (michoski) <[email protected]
>>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I thought %FROMHOST% caused a DNS lookup on rsyslog's side, while
>>>> %HOSTNAME% just used the hostname sent in the message...others will
>>>> correct if my memory is bad.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> That's right, but I think we fall back to a dns lookup if there is no
>>> detectable hostname in the message(not 100% sure, though).
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> So if %HOSTNAME% is not right, it must be
>>>> something on the client side.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> can very well be, but sounded more like DNS resolution.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> I think you just use %rawmsg% to get the raw message.  :-)
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.rsyslog.com/doc/property_replacer.html
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> yup or use
>>> 
>>> *.* /var/log/messagedebug;RSYSLOG_DebugFormat
>>> 
>>> which will write out all properties.
>> 
>> This is how a normal message looks like:
>> 
>> Debug line with all properties:
>> FROMHOST: '172.16.16.4', fromhost-ip: '172.16.16.4', HOSTNAME: 
>> 'xyz-DDDD-02', PRI: 86,
>> syslogtag 'su[42661]:', programname: 'su', APP-NAME: 'su', PROCID: '42661', 
>> MSGID: '-',
>> TIMESTAMP: 'Aug 19 02:11:58', STRUCTURED-DATA: '-',
>> msg: ' pam_unix(su:session): session closed for user postgres'
>> escaped msg: ' pam_unix(su:session): session closed for user postgres'
>> inputname: imtcp rawmsg: '<86>Aug 19 02:11:58 xyz-DDDD-02 su[42661]: 
>> pam_unix(su:session): session closed for user postgres'
>> 
>> Are we interested in this only, or also what debug message is going to look 
>> like when the suspected DNS resolution failure occurs again?
> 
> It would be good to get one of a failing message
> 
> In this case, the HOSTNAME is pulled directly from the rawmsg, so no DNS 
> lookup is done there.
> 
> normally FROMHOST is a DNS lookup of fromhost-ip, so this message shows a 
> "normal" DNS failure.
> 
> This makes me think that you have a situation where the sender isn't properly 
> populating the hostname field of the message under some conditions.

Alright, it happened again yesterday and these two debug messages follow 
exactly one after another:

Debug line with all properties:
FROMHOST: '172.16.16.5', fromhost-ip: '172.16.16.5', HOSTNAME: 'xyz-DDDD-03', 
PRI: 29,
syslogtag 'dbus[1767]:', programname: 'dbus', APP-NAME: 'dbus', PROCID: '1767', 
MSGID: '-',
TIMESTAMP: 'Aug 19 18:11:57', STRUCTURED-DATA: '-',
msg: ' [system] Reloaded configuration'
escaped msg: ' [system] Reloaded configuration'
inputname: imtcp rawmsg: '<29>Aug 19 18:11:57 xyz-DDDD-03 dbus[1767]: [system] 
Reloaded configuration'

Debug line with all properties:
FROMHOST: '172.16.16.5', fromhost-ip: '172.16.16.5', HOSTNAME: '172.16.16.5', 
PRI: 29,
syslogtag '', programname: '', APP-NAME: '', PROCID: '-', MSGID: '-',
TIMESTAMP: 'Aug 19 18:11:57', STRUCTURED-DATA: '-',
msg: ' dbus[1767]: last message repeated 4 times'
escaped msg: ' dbus[1767]: last message repeated 4 times'
inputname: imtcp rawmsg: '<29>Aug 19 18:11:57  dbus[1767]: last message 
repeated 4 times'

Then it goes back to proper host name resolution and fails again after some 
time:

Debug line with all properties:
FROMHOST: '172.16.16.5', fromhost-ip: '172.16.16.5', HOSTNAME: 'xyz-DDDD-03', 
PRI: 13,
syslogtag 'dataeng:', programname: 'dataeng', APP-NAME: 'dataeng', PROCID: '-', 
MSGID: '-',
TIMESTAMP: 'Aug 19 18:12:03', STRUCTURED-DATA: '-',
msg: ' NOTE: OS SNMP support not installed'
escaped msg: ' NOTE: OS SNMP support not installed'
inputname: imtcp rawmsg: '<13>Aug 19 18:12:03 xyz-DDDD-03 dataeng: NOTE: OS 
SNMP support not installed'

Debug line with all properties:
FROMHOST: '172.16.16.5', fromhost-ip: '172.16.16.5', HOSTNAME: '172.16.16.5', 
PRI: 29,
syslogtag '', programname: '', APP-NAME: '', PROCID: '-', MSGID: '-',
TIMESTAMP: 'Aug 19 18:12:03', STRUCTURED-DATA: '-',
msg: ' dbus[1767]: last message repeated 4 times'
escaped msg: ' dbus[1767]: last message repeated 4 times'
inputname: imtcp rawmsg: '<29>Aug 19 18:12:03  dbus[1767]: last message 
repeated 4 times'

Note how APP-NAME: '', PROCID: '-', MSGID: '-', are just the "-" sign when 
HOSTNAME becomes an IP address.

Then it happened again:

Debug line with all properties:
FROMHOST: '172.16.16.5', fromhost-ip: '172.16.16.5', HOSTNAME: '172.16.16.5', 
PRI: 29,
syslogtag '', programname: '', APP-NAME: '', PROCID: '-', MSGID: '-',
TIMESTAMP: 'Aug 19 18:12:17', STRUCTURED-DATA: '-',
msg: ' dbus[1767]: last message repeated 11 times'
escaped msg: ' dbus[1767]: last message repeated 11 times'
inputname: imtcp rawmsg: '<29>Aug 19 18:12:17  dbus[1767]: last message 
repeated 11 times'

The /var/log/syslog on 172.16.16.5 has these entries that match the time of the 
ones mentioned above:

Aug 19 17:55:01 xyz-DDDD-03 CRON[46232]: (root) CMD (command -v debian-sa1 > 
/dev/null && debian-sa1 1 1)
Aug 19 18:05:01 xyz-DDDD-03 CRON[49559]: (root) CMD (command -v debian-sa1 > 
/dev/null && debian-sa1 1 1)
Aug 19 18:11:57 xyz-DDDD-03 dbus[1767]: [system] Reloaded configuration
Aug 19 18:12:03  dbus[1767]: last message repeated 4 times
Aug 19 18:12:03 xyz-DDDD-03 dataeng: NOTE: OS SNMP support not installed
Aug 19 18:12:04 xyz-DDDD-03 dbus[1767]: [system] Reloaded configuration
Aug 19 18:12:17  dbus[1767]: last message repeated 11 times
Aug 19 18:12:17 xyz-DDDD-03 ata_id[55947]: HDIO_GET_IDENTITY failed for 
'/dev/sdc': Invalid argument
Aug 19 18:12:17 xyz-DDDD-03 dbus[1767]: [system] Reloaded configuration
Aug 19 18:12:17 xyz-DDDD-03 dbus[1767]: [system] Reloaded configuration

So, as we can see the hostname never appears in the client log file actually.

Ivan
_______________________________________________
rsyslog mailing list
http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/
What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards
NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of 
sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE 
THAT.

Reply via email to