> "Anton" == Anton Okmianski (aokmians) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Anton> Good to have that clear! I also second Rainer that we had
Anton> consensus on the list on everything that is in
Anton> syslog-protocol now. The consensus was built over 2 years,
There are several question
Good to have that clear!
I also second Rainer that we had consensus on the list on everything that is in
syslog-protocol now. The consensus was built over 2 years, 15 revisions, and is
well-documented in list archives and Rainer's web site
http://www.syslog.cc/ietf. But I won't object to revis
Greetings. I'd like to draw yo;ur attention to section 4 of RFC 2418.
This section requires area directors to consult with a working group
prior to concluding that working group. At the meeting in Vancouver I
started such a consultation by noting that once the next set of
milestones is approve
Hi.
Participants who attend the meetings are expected to also join the
list. It is the consensus on the list that should be driving the
working group, not what decisions are being made in meetings.
--Sam
___
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.or
As one of the many
lurkers on this list, I have been monitoring this WG's activities and I'm a bit
concerned with the recent posts. I had high hopes that some form of logging
standardization might materialize, but that now seems to be in
question.
Recent regulations
within the U.S. (e.g.,
Darren,
I mostly agree, but my main point is that all this has been discussed.
My presentation from 2 years ago covers exactly these issues.
For example...
22 Jan 2004 - talking about backwards compatibility and its importance
http://www.syslog.cc/ietf/autoarc/msg0.html
3 Feb 2004 - talking
Hi all,
> If I get the essence in Darren's message right,
> what he is proposing is to create a layered architecture for syslog.
Yes, by using what's gone before us as the way to start doing that.
> Please face it: on the WG mailing list, we are pressing for ever and
> ever change. More and more
Hi all,
Darren's post clearly shows what is wrong with this WG: we are
re-iterating everything. If I get the essence in Darren's message right,
what he is proposing is to create a layered architecture for syslog. If
you look at my presentation from two years ago (!), you will see that
this was th
