Subject: [Syslog] Charter revision

From: Chris Lonvick <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:16:43 -0800 (PST)

Hi Folks,

I'd like to start the discussion of revising our charter.  We will need to 
address various parts of this.

1 - At the meeting, it was clear that many people thought that we should
     be building on the accepted syslog header.

A)  Should the WG accept that the observed syslog header format is good 
enough and we should build on top of that?  (We can RECOMMEND a better 
timestamp and a few other features but we will not REQUIRE anything.)

B)  Should the WG define a standard header still based upon 
<PRI>Timestamp...  ?

2 - Sam recommended that the WG consider a secure transport - or have an
     explanation of why we don't have one.  One option would be to allow
     syslog-tranport-udp to progress at this point while we decide upon
     (1) above.

Yes/No )  Should the WG let syslog-transport-udp progress without 
syslog-protocol at this time?

Yes/No )  Should the WG consider another secure substrate (in addition to 
RFC3195)?  [Any of SSH, SSL, dtls, etc.]

Please respond to this.  Additional comment will be appreciated.  Based 
upon what I hear back, I'll start drafting a revised charter.

Thanks,
Chris

_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog