Rainer: If syslog client sends a message over TCP/UDP/IP, it by definition has an IP address. If it send the message locally, then I think 127.0.0.1 (local IP) is more appropriate.
But I am assuming that we won't use syslog-protocol through say local UNIX pipes like syslog does now locally on say Solaris. If we do want to support that, than we need the case of an unspecified IP. But if syslog is used over TCP/IP, "unspecified IP" is an oxymoron. Anton. > -----Original Message----- > From: Rainer Gerhards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 9:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Anton Okmianski > Subject: RE: Issue 14: allow unqualified hostname > > > Anton & all, > > in IPv6, we have the "unspecified address", which I think is > exactly what we should use in the case an device does > actually know nothing about itself (last case in Anton's > messsage below) it is "0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0". > > Some links: > http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-address-space > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ios_abcs_ios_t > he_abcs_ip > _version_60900aecd800c111d.html > > According to RFC 3330 > (http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3330.txt), I think we can > also use "0.0.0.0" for IPv4 addressing in this case. > > Comments are highly appreciated. > > Rainer > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Anton Okmianski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 10:19 PM > > To: Rainer Gerhards > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Issue 14: allow unqualified hostname > > > > Rainer: > > > > I like Devin's suggestion of recommending a specific > preference order: > > > > FQDN > > Static IPv4/IPv6 > > Hostname > > Dynamic IPv4/IPv6 > > "127.0.0.1" (when everything is unknown) > > > > Maybe the language should be a bit more restrictive than > just SHOULDs > > and MAYs here. Maybe: "MUST provide FQDN if it is known. > If unknown - > > static IP. If unknown -- hostname. If unknown - dynamic IP. If > > unknown -- (a) can't use syslog or (b) we explain what they should > > use." > > > > I don't know if we decided on the last one. If syslog is to be used > > for remote logging only, then requiring knowledge of at > least an IP is > > acceptable. If, however, we expect it to be used in host-local > > scenarios as well, then we need to clarify what they should > there when > > nothing I known. Devin suggested 127.0.0.1. I like it. Maybe also > > allow an IPv6 equivalent of that as well if it exists. > > > > Thanks, > > Anton. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Rainer Gerhards > > > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 11:14 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Issue 14: allow unqualified hostname > > > > > > > > > Hi WG, > > > > > > this is in regard to issue 14, which talks about allowing the > > > unqualified hostname. Based on previous feedback, I think > > > this is concensus in the WG (see > > > http://www.syslog.cc/ietf/protocol/issue14.htm> l > > > for a short > > > list). > > > > > > If nobody objects, I will go ahead and > > > edit it in the following way: > > > > > > Hostname & FQDN SHOULD be used, IP (v4/6) address or "bare" > > > hostname MAY be used. > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > >
