On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Nicolas Williams wrote:
Each message could reference the schema/dtd that it conforms to...
In which case you have to update each application. In which case you
might as well update them to emit an enumerated event rather than a
string. In which case you're looking at
Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 05:53:17PM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
Oh! Well then... But those deal in structured data also...
It's a bit different in that you have to specify enterpriseId in order
to get to a parsed message content, as opposed to just meta
information.
Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 04:58:27PM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
It depends on whether there is in fact a solid problem out there that
this solves. I'm unconvinced on that. Giving message integrity to
syslog seems a bit wobbly to me, but I guess I can see why someone
On 6/9/06, Gavin Maltby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/06 11:31, Darren Reed wrote:
To bring the syslogd shipped with Solaris up to a level that is
more in line with what is found in other systems today, I'd like
to propose a project to upgrade it.
Tasks currently scoped out for this
Gavin Maltby writes:
On 06/09/06 12:31, Darren J Moffat wrote:
What problem does this solve ?
Trawling syslog files with miserable Perl scripts and the like, trying to
rebuild structure from a not very well-formed or structured ascii text.
Writing a syslog event monitor should not
:19 AM
To: Darren J Moffat
Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; networking-discuss@opensolaris.org;
Darren Reed
Subject: [networking-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal for new
OpenSolaris project: modernise syslogd
Hi
On 06/09/06 13:56, Darren J Moffat wrote:
Gavin Maltby
Nicolas Williams writes:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 12:12:33PM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
Instead, syslog is a great dumping ground for all sorts of debug and
human-only messages, and will likely be treated that way indefinitely.
I would oppose an effort to apply structure on top of something
Nicolas Williams writes:
Yes, I'm well aware of that effort. I think it's misguided for
exactly the same reasons.
Have you said so on the WG list?
They were quite far along when I found out, plus I don't have the time
to fight every fight. If they're sure it's right, I'll defer, but I
Nicolas Williams writes:
Failing to produce those sorts of schema leaves you with just a
handful of code numbers plus free-form text wrapped prettily in XML.
Each message could reference the schema/dtd that it conforms to...
And existing MIBs could be re-used, perhaps.
I await that MIB
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 12:12:33PM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
Instead, syslog is a great dumping ground for all sorts of debug and
human-only messages, and will likely be treated that way indefinitely.
I would oppose an effort to apply structure on top of something that
is inherently without
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 10:58:09PM +0800, Darren Reed wrote:
If there is any evolution of the log file format, it will
be to use XML. [...]
Sure, but the schema will have to be influenced by what the IETF SYSLOG
WG ends up doing w.r.t. structured messages.
11 matches
Mail list logo
