IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Syslog] AD review discuss/comments for draft-ietf-syslog-dtls

Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com> Sat, 22 May 2010 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <turners@ieca.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 B54633A6D24 for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 May 2010 08:16:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.405
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.405 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.407, BAYES_50=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 wWOZXRcD9rSK for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 May 2010 08:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp111.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com (smtp111.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.68.76]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C73DC3A6D23 for <syslog@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 May 2010 08:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 48281 invoked from network); 22 May 2010 15:16:21 -0000
Received: from thunderfish.local (turners@96.241.2.192 with plain) by smtp111.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 May 2010 08:16:21 -0700 PDT
X-Yahoo-SMTP: ZrP3VLSswBDL75pF8ymZHDSu9B.vcMfDPgLJ
X-YMail-OSG: 1hTUWcUVM1kgV2FdV1jQLiqV3bxEAoJ2YztC.jf9NwixLkayt2gk152SclShFXshohOmFNTmggv7Mv_tYtcJhoCQouc3uaNaPBTgiiamu6vbRGZypYEpdFY_tGLn5K4ccF3AcmNnRnoxrNDidVfIwOweNmi6izJM0U1WCEpSWIOBWZVNFkXr7PZrjWl_ymuFgUTEO3yfsxyb_cV7ZkQ3orrc.4wCa3BJMK3ECoRGrtKPEoKc1MNC76jWzaHqopPLiujdG_S2EK9Ww66JTpW4BZsdiSMT4ERru3o5qRbkwghdMY_VwlrmYpU-
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Message-ID: <4BF7F544.70004@ieca.com>
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 11:16:20 -0400
From: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
References: <20100511182040.16429@web6.nyc1.bluetie.com> <01c701caf904$d1662c40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <01c701caf904$d1662c40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: syslog <syslog@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Syslog] AD review discuss/comments for draft-ietf-syslog-dtls
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: Sat, 22 May 2010 15:16:36 -0000

t.petch wrote:
> I see that this I-D had entered 'Revised I-D needed' which I would like to
> progress.
> 
> I see several comments about maximum record size, including a suggestion that we
> should make the 'SHOULD NOT' a 'MUST NOT' exceed 2**14.
> 
> I am dead set against this change.  We had a clear requirment, early on, to
> allow 65k messages, and I think it wrong to MUST NOT that requirement. The text
> in the other I-Ds is a compromise to strke a balance between this and having
> everything fit in 576 byte; I think we have the balance right.

Tom,

My response to Alexey was that this I-D borrows that particular 
requirement from RFC4347 and that this I-D shouldn't be upping the 
requirement.  If it's okay with you, I'll forward him your response. 
The way I read his comment was that he's just asking why - he's not 
really requesting a change.

spt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email