I think that this document has some way to go. It has introduced, and woven together, both TLS and TCP transport, which I think wrong. Ideally, I think that we should have two separate documents, one dealing with TLS, the other with TCP issues; given that both would be short, it is probably sensible to have only the one, but I still see the need for separation within the document. After all, DTLS exists: an outsider could, should, think that syslog is UDP-based, DTLS provides UDP security so DTLS is the obvious choice, what on earth is this document talking about? We need a section on DTLS (if only justifying why it is not for further consideration). And, for me, that alone justifies teasing out the TLS issues from the TCP issues; is FRAME-LEN needed over DTLS?.
That said, I do not think that this document adequately covers the TCP issues, ones that have surfaced on the list before. TLSoTCP can deliver one syslog message, many syslog messages, part of a syslog message or a combination thereof - it is in the nature of a stream protocol. This needs spelling out. A TCP connection takes time to set up, TLSoTCP longer. This needs spelling out; if timely delivery is a concern, then the connection should be established in advance. The section on TCP termination is too weak. If we are recommending a timeout, then we should recommend a value, even specifying that it should be configurable over a range. And if we cannot agree on such values, I do not think we should be specifying a timeout. TCP perforce introduces flow control. This will slow down and rate limit messages; what is the impact of this on the application? TCP failures can terminate the connection! Again, this has an impact on the application with the time taken to become aware that the connection has failed. 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
