Re: URGENT: - Re: FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls
Balazs Scheidler <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.syslog |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 11:00 -0700, Chris Lonvick wrote: > Hi Folks, > > We have two people who have said that we don't need a system port. I'd > like to have an answer back to the IESG later today (Wednesday) so they > can move forward with it tomorrow (Thursday telechat). If we don't hear > anything else back we'll assume that's the consensus of the WG. > I agree too. Having a registered port is enough. logservers are usually dedicated boxes anyway, so the chances of a collision is low. Also, the logserver process starts early in the boot process, so clients running on the same box will most probably find the port already taken. PS: any chance the port allocation can happen in a few weeks? we're about to release a syslog-ng version that supports syslog-protocol and I would like to use the final port right from the start instead of having to change it later. -- Bazsi _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog