Re: [Syslog] Issue 8

Hi,

This syslog/dtls/dccp issue revolves around mandatory-to-implement but
not mandatory-to-use.

The draft recommends using syslog/DTLS over DCCP when DCCP is
available.
If DCCP is available in an environment, the environment probably
demands congestion awareness and control.

The RECOMMEND is not about whether DCCP is available at
implementation-time, but whether DCCP is available at use-time.
If implementations don't include support for the ***interface***
between (syslog/DTLS) and (DCCP), then even if DCCP is available at
use-time, users won't be able to use it.
This is similar to the MUST implement/SHOULD use advice in section 7
of BCP 61 (RFC3365).
A MUST-implement does not say that the implementer MUST implement
DCCP, only the interface to DCCP.

The interface between (syslog/DTLS) and (DCCP) should be MUST
implement, so that when DCCP is available in the user environment,
syslog can use it.

dbh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: syslog-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:syslog-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of t.petch
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 4:06 AM
> To: Chris Lonvick; syslog@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Syslog] Issue 8 - Tim Polk DISCUSS
> 
> Yes, I agree with this, that DCCP is recommended but only if 
> it is available
> (which I do not expect it to be:-) so update to s.6, leave s.5
alone.
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Lonvick" <clonvick@cisco.com>
> To: <syslog@ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:19 PM
> Subject: [Syslog] Issue 8 - Tim Polk DISCUSS
> 
> 
> > Issue 8 - Tim Polk DISCUSS
> >
> > Discuss:
> > There seems to be an essential disconnect between the conformance
> > rquirements and the deployment guidance in this specification
> >
> > The second paragraph of Section 6 Congestion Control states:
> >
> >     DCCP has congestion control.  For this reason the 
> syslog over DTLS
> >     over DCCP option is recommended in preference to the 
> syslog over the
> >     DTLS over UDP option.
> >
> > However, in Section 5.1,  Transport
> >
> >     DTLS can run over multiple transports.  Implementations of
this
> >     specification MUST support DTLS over UDP and SHOULD 
> support DTLS over
> >     DCCP [RFC5238].
> >
> > For alignment with Section 6, it would seem that "MUST 
> support DTLS over
> > DCCP" would be more appropriate.
> >
> > Proposed resolution by Sean:
> > vvv
> > As noted by Lars (before my time on either the IESG or syslog
list):
> >
> >    If DCCP is available (not usually the case) running DTLS 
> over it is
> >    trivial, so you could also make this a MUST. DCCP 
> support itself is
> >    obviously not a MUST.
> >
> > Maybe what we really ought to be saying is Section 6 (which is
just
> > about congestion control):
> >
> >    DCCP has congestion control.  For this reason when DCCP 
> is available,
> >    syslog over DTLS over DCCP is recommended in preference 
> to the syslog
> >    over the DTLS over UDP option.
> >
> > and we leave Section 5 alone?
> > ^^^
> >
> > Tim Polk responded:
> > vvv
> > I will defer to Lars on this one.  Since we can't make DCCP 
> support a
> > MUST, your suggested text for Section 6 would resolve what 
> remains of my
> > issue.
> > ^^^
> >
> > ACTION:  Authors to review proposed resolution and discuss on
list.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Syslog mailing list
> > Syslog@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> Syslog@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
> 