Miao, I agree with your comments. However, using the LF as a record delimited would still allow us to interop with existing syslog/tls implementations. This is my major point. I think it is worth it.
Rainer > -----Original Message----- > From: Miao Fuyou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 12:00 PM > To: 'Tom Petch'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Syslog] delineated > datagramswasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt > > > TLS uses SHA-1 or MD5 in ciphersuite for message integrity > verification. If > bytes lost happens during transferring, the message will be > dropped by TLS. > That is also the cause that we need a security mechanism for Syslog. > > As for error of encoding/decoding, I believe if an application does > encoding/decoding in a wrong way, you must not expect it do > it right with > other mechanism, such as LF. > > Redundancy to improve robustness is good idea, but I don't > think it applies > to this case. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom Petch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:43 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [Syslog] delineated datagrams > > wasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt > > > > I wonder if others share my concern about the lack of > > robustness in the way in which datagrams are delineated in > > the stream protocol (a TCP rather than a TLS issue). > > > > The system works as long as > > - the frame length is encoded perfectly > > - the frame length is decoded perfectly > > - no bytes are inserted or removed in error which is > > doubtless true in some networks, but I would prefer not to > rely on it. > > > > So, when an error occurs, can the Collector/Relay detect it? > > Can the Collector/Relay recover synch? If not, what does the > > Collector/Relay do? > > > > There is very little redundancy in the definition of frame > > length, and syslog messages have very little structure to > > help the application, so I think that this is an issue we > > should address. > > > > Tom Petch > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David B Harrington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 4:26 PM > > Subject: [Syslog] draft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt > > > > > > Hi, > > > > A new revision of the syslog/TLS draft is available. > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01 > > .txt > > > > We need reviewers. > > Can we get > > 1) a person to check the grammar? > > 2) a person to check the syslog technical parts? > > 3) a person to check compatibility with the other WG documents? > > 4) a person to check the TLS technical parts? > > > > We also need general reviews of the document by multiple people. > > > > Thanks, > > David Harrington > > co-chair, Syslog WG > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Syslog mailing list > > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Syslog mailing list > > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Syslog mailing list > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
