RE: [Syslog] delineated datagramswasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt

Miao,

I agree with your comments. However, using the LF as a record delimited
would still allow us to interop with existing syslog/tls
implementations. This is my major point. I think it is worth it.

Rainer 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miao Fuyou [mailto:miaofy@huawei.com] 
> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 12:00 PM
> To: 'Tom Petch'; syslog@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Syslog] delineated 
> datagramswasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
> 
> 
> TLS uses SHA-1 or MD5 in ciphersuite for message integrity 
> verification. If
> bytes lost happens during transferring, the message will be 
> dropped by TLS.
> That is also the cause that we need a security mechanism for Syslog.  
> 
> As for error of encoding/decoding, I believe if an application does
> encoding/decoding in a wrong way, you must not expect it do 
> it right with
> other mechanism, such as LF. 
> 
> Redundancy to improve robustness is  good idea, but I don't 
> think it applies
> to this case.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Petch [mailto:nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:43 PM
> > To: syslog@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Syslog] delineated datagrams 
> > wasdraft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt
> > 
> > I wonder if others share my concern about the lack of 
> > robustness in the way in which datagrams are delineated in 
> > the stream protocol (a TCP rather than a TLS issue).
> > 
> > The system works as long as
> >  - the frame length is encoded perfectly
> >  - the frame length is decoded perfectly
> >  - no bytes are inserted or removed in error which is 
> > doubtless true in some networks, but I would prefer not to 
> rely on it.
> > 
> > So, when an error occurs, can the Collector/Relay detect it?  
> > Can the Collector/Relay recover synch?  If not, what does the 
> > Collector/Relay do?
> > 
> > There is very little redundancy in the definition of frame 
> > length, and syslog messages have very little structure to 
> > help the application, so I think that this is an issue we 
> > should address.
> > 
> > Tom Petch
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David B Harrington" <dbharrington@comcast.net>
> > To: <syslog@ietf.org>
> > 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
> > ietfdbh@comcast.net
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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