IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com> Fri, 21 May 2010 20:32 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 87BBE3A6F33 for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 May 2010 13:32:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.94
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.94 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.941, BAYES_50=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 k04flzViYqmK for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 May 2010 13:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c2beaomr08.btconnect.com (c2beaomr08.btconnect.com [213.123.26.186]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58A1228C7E7 for <syslog@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 May 2010 10:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pc6 (host86-172-78-59.range86-172.btcentralplus.com [86.172.78.59]) by c2beaomr08.btconnect.com with SMTP id ESW09634; Fri, 21 May 2010 18:46:42 +0100 (BST)
X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=0001.0A0B0302.4BF6C702.01A3, actions=tag
Message-ID: <01c701caf904$d1662c40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: jsalowey@cisco.com, Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>
References: <20100511182040.16429@web6.nyc1.bluetie.com>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 18:37:52 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
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=c2beaomr08.btconnect.com
X-Junkmail-SD-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0209.4BF6C712.0194, 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
Cc: syslog <syslog@ietf.org>
Subject: [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: Fri, 21 May 2010 20:33:56 -0000

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 Petch

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email