On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 18:19 -0800, Chris Lonvick wrote: > Hi, > > We started syslog-sign before we had Structured Data, and the original > author was creating a mechanism that could be used within the RFC 3164 > framework. However, times have changed. We now have syslog-protocol with > SDs. > > Does the WG feel that syslog-sign should contain normative information on > how to utilize the syslog-sign mechanism in the RFC 3164 format? > > Answers can be: > __ Yes - leave it, it forms a bridge for transition, > __ No - take it out, we need to move the world along, > __ Maybe - move it to a non-normative appendix
No. We should give reasons to migrate to the new protocol, syslog-sign might be one of them, and I doubt there'd be real-world implementations of syslog-sign over RFC3164 -- Bazsi _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
