RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-20 Thread Anton Okmianski \(aokmians\)
: Friday, January 20, 2006 8:57 AM To: Tom Petch Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation Is the truncation of a message on a UTF-8 boundary rather than within an extended character something that syslog daemons SHOULD do rather than MUST do ? (To use the RFC words

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-20 Thread Tom Petch
. Tom Petch - Original Message - From: Anton Okmianski (aokmians) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Darren Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tom Petch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 4:39 PM Subject: RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation I think the suggestion from me and Tom

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-19 Thread Tom Petch
- Original Message - From: Rainer Gerhards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Petch [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Darren Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 9:32 AM Subject: RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation Tom, I agree there are some issues with truncation

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-17 Thread Tom Petch
- Original Message - From: Darren Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Petch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 10:51 PM Subject: Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] Truncation of UTF-8 is actually slightly

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-16 Thread Darren Reed
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] Truncation of UTF-8 is actually slightly worse than has been described. It is possible to determine from the UTF-8 octets where one coded character ends and another begins. But because Unicode contains combining characters, with no limit on

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-13 Thread Tom Petch
- From: Rainer Gerhards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Anton Okmianski (aokmians) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 11:30 AM Subject: RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation Anton and all, I have now changed section 6.1 to: ### 6.1. Message Length Syslog message

RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-12 Thread Anton Okmianski \(aokmians\)
the original sender anyway. It is not ideal, whichever way you slice it. Anton. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Balazs Scheidler Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 5:07 AM To: Rainer Gerhards Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Syslog] Sec

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-11 Thread Darren Reed
Anton and all, I have now changed section 6.1 to: ### 6.1. Message Length .. Well written and very sensible. Darren ___ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-11 Thread Balazs Scheidler
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 22:38 +1100, Darren Reed wrote: Anton and all, I have now changed section 6.1 to: ### 6.1. Message Length .. Well written and very sensible. I like it too :) -- Bazsi ___ Syslog mailing list

RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-11 Thread Anton Okmianski \(aokmians\)
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 4:49 PM To: Anton Okmianski (aokmians) Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation Rainer: I agree - this is better than a convoluted rule. I

RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-09 Thread Rainer Gerhards
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anton Okmianski (aokmians) Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 9:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation Rainer and all: I started reading draft #16. Since we are revisiting everything... I am

RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-09 Thread Anton Okmianski \(aokmians\)
3:21 AM To: Anton Okmianski (aokmians) Subject: RE: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation Anton, Darren, I agree that the truncation rule is probably not really useful, even confusing. I think it is hard to predict for any potential message if the more interesting content is in STRUCTURED-DATA

Re: [Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-07 Thread Darren Reed
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] Rainer and all: .. Receivers SHOULD follow this order of preference when it comes to truncation: 1) No truncation 2) Truncation by dropping SD-ELEMENTs 3) If 2) not sufficient, truncate MSG I don't think that this is a good

[Syslog] Sec 6.1: Truncation

2006-01-06 Thread Anton Okmianski \(aokmians\)
Rainer and all: I started reading draft #16. Since we are revisiting everything... I am not very comfortable with the current truncation rules. Receivers SHOULD follow this order of preference when it comes to truncation: 1) No truncation 2) Truncation by dropping SD-ELEMENTs 3) If 2) not