hi

Is silence consent on this one? I'm interested to know if we agree with
this.

Thanks,

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chisholm,
Sharon [CAR:5K50:EXCH]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 3:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Syslog-sec] syslog message truncation


hi

Ok. My current thinking on message truncation is that we want to encourage
the dropping of the SD-PARAMS and the retention of the message text. This is
the more unique bit and makes for much simpler truncation. We can add a bit
to the header if we want or indicate that if the SD-PARAM list is blank,
then truncation may have occurred. Ok. a bit in the header is probably
better.

So, the preference is

1) No truncation
2) Truncation by dropping SD-PARAMS; 
3) If 2) not sufficient, truncate message
4) In the case that truncation cannot result in a valid message then
dropping. Note that given the current truncation algorithm, this may not
actually occur.

Sharon



-----Original Message-----
From: Rainer Gerhards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 7:42 AM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:5K50:EXCH]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Syslog-sec] syslog message truncation


Sharon,

> If truncation is required, then the point of truncation be determined. 
> If it is within the message text, then the truncation bit be set 
> within the message header and the message be sent with its reduced 
> size. If the point
> of truncation is somewhere before the message text, then this 
> message be
> discarded.

I am not sure if it is appropriate to drop the message completely. At least
the drop should be optional (maybe with a rule that the truncated message
should not further be forwarded).

I am concerned because I think we might loose vital information in this
case.

As an alternate approach, the "truncation information field" could have
three values:

n - no truncation occured
m - truncation im MSG part
s - truncation in STRUCTURED-DATA part

that would convey enough information to the (ultimate) receiver so that it
can decide how to act on a message.

Comments?

Rainer

_______________________________________________
Syslog-sec mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec

_______________________________________________
Syslog-sec mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec

Reply via email to