Re: [sip-clf] draft CLF charter

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Wed, 22 July 2009 13:49 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sip-clf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-clf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 800C93A6C15 for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MiaTKSjJo4i6 for <sip-clf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AE2C3A6BDF for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dn3-232.estacado.net (vicuna-alt.estacado.net [75.53.54.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6MDnrx3051611 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:49:53 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Message-Id: <CB8F8D6E-5908-446A-84B1-B4FF84010F06@nostrum.com>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
To: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A664053.7070603@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:49:52 -0500
References: <3B33A97D-7E19-4A08-A431-A085D53A2A6E@nostrum.com> <D5E606B8-0811-4D40-AA76-ED989B00FD02@nostrum.com> <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A0401892AF4@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <4A664053.7070603@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 75.53.54.121 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: sip-clf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] draft CLF charter
X-BeenThere: sip-clf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Common Log File format discussion list <sip-clf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-clf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 13:49:58 -0000

Just to make sure we are all on the same page:

On Jul 21, 2009, at 5:25 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:

> Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
>> A few comments after the first reading of the charter.
>
> Dan: Thanks for your feedback; more inline.
>
>> - Is it Common Log File as it appears at the first instance, or  
>> Common
>> Log Format?
>
> CLF expands to Common Log File, though colloquially you will
> see references to "the CLF format", which simply means the
> specific fields and their representation.

This is something we need to state more clearly.

Are we defining a file are we defining a format that might go in a file?

I think the proposals I've read so far are trying to do the second.
Does anyone disagree?

I was planning to  change the word File Dan is pointing  to in the
proposed charter to Format.

RjS