Hi Anton, On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Anton Okmianski wrote:
> Rainer: > > I agree with your assessment. I also don't see any benefit in > restricting the source port. Firewalls can be configured with target > port filtering. So, why restrict something if it has no benefit to the > standard. > > Instead of omitting discussion of source port like the current draft > does, I think it is a good point to explicitly mention that source port > is undefined, so there is no ambiguity for those familiar with RFC 3164. It would be best to have it in there for completeness. The goal should be that implementers will be able to read syslog-transport-udp and syslog-protocol without having to refer to any other documents about syslog (like 3164) to produce an interoperable implementation. Thanks, Chris
