IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Syslog] Issue 8 - Tim Polk DISCUSS

"t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com> Tue, 08 June 2010 10:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.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 582FB28C16C for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 03:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 tlljr2m3wwUn for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 03:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c2bthomr13.btconnect.com (c2bthomr13.btconnect.com [213.123.20.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD6128C152 for <syslog@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 03:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pc6 (host86-172-78-59.range86-172.btcentralplus.com [86.172.78.59]) by c2bthomr13.btconnect.com with SMTP id FJY64634; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:03:19 +0100 (BST)
X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=0001.0A0B0301.4C0E1567.012B, actions=tag
Message-ID: <01d301cb06e9$01ec4880$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>, syslog@ietf.org
References: <Pine.GSO.4.63.1006070758110.27400@sjc-cde-011.cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:05:30 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2bthomr13.btconnect.com
X-Junkmail-SD-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0209.4C0E1575.0280, ss=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2009-07-20 21:54:04, dmn=5.7.1/2009-08-27, mode=single engine
X-Junkmail-IWF: false
Subject: Re: [Syslog] Issue 8 - Tim Polk DISCUSS
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: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:04:42 -0000

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email