Re: Request for Feedback - Zeek Process Supervision Model
"Seth Hall" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.detection.bro |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 20 Mar 2019, at 3:49, Michał Purzyński wrote: > I have only one request so far, still reading the proposal. Can we > make > sure that we support a configuration where in a stable state (after > initialization has been done) there is only one worker process per > core, > without all those run-bro scripts and the like? All of that optimization should be possible. It wasn't included in the proposal because it should be possible to build on top of whatever this ends up looking like in the end and I don't think any of us quite know what that actual config would look like. If you have some suggestions about how the configuration should look or work or even thoughts about the mechanism it should use feel free to speak up. :) .Seth -- Seth Hall * Corelight, Inc * www.corelight.com _______________________________________________ Zeek mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/zeek