[Syslog] Issue 13 - DCCP?
Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com> Mon, 07 June 2010 17:23 UTC
Return-Path: <clonvick@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: syslog@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: syslog@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 979B428C103 for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 10:23:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.025
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.025 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.375, BAYES_40=-0.185, FRT_STRONG2=1.535, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 x9ux-ZOhXcsY for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 10:23:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95BAD28C757 for <syslog@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 09:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsoGAP6qDEyrRN+J/2dsb2JhbACSLQEBjBhxpGGaAoUXBINK
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,378,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="140533987"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jun 2010 15:21:22 +0000
Received: from sjc-cde-011.cisco.com (sjc-cde-011.cisco.com [171.69.16.68]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o57FLMDS027626 for <syslog@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 15:21:22 GMT
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 08:21:21 -0700
From: Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>
To: syslog@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.1006070812100.27400@sjc-cde-011.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Subject: [Syslog] Issue 13 - DCCP?
X-BeenThere: syslog@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Issues in Network Event Logging <syslog.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog>, <mailto:syslog-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/syslog>
List-Post: <mailto:syslog@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:syslog-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog>, <mailto:syslog-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 17:23:27 -0000
Issue 13 - DCCP? Tom Petch wrote: vvv Another issue that came up from the IESG is the relative roles of UDP and DCCP as a substrate. In this context, the discussions on tsvwg which Lars is steering about SCTP, DCCP and UDP make interesting reading, with some contributors asserting that the only way to get a packet through a complex network is with UDP, that SCTP and DCCP are (comparative) failures that just don't get recognised widely enough. Certainly my (limited) view is that UDP is the MUST HAVE, the one that will give maximum interoperability so while DCCP is technically superior, making it the MUST implement will simply cause this I-D to be ignored by most. I haven't seen any response from Lars on this issue. ^^^ DBH responded: vvv Lars provided advice quite a while back. I concur with his advice. Implementers MUST implement support for DCCP (which should require minimal changes from support for UDP), so that if DCCP is available, and the operator chooses to use DCCPP, the implementation will work with DCCP. I view this as very similar to our standard security posture - stroing security is MUST implement, so it is available if the operator wants it. The operator is not required to use it. ^^^ ACTION: None - I think this is resolved.
- [Syslog] Issue 13 - DCCP? Chris Lonvick
- Re: [Syslog] Issue 13 - DCCP? t.petch