Re: Syslog-sign: Last minor clarifications/nits

Alexander Clemm (alex) schrieb:
> On the first item, yes, the first item (RSID) is clearly a counter; a
> time stamp cannot be used, nor can a value that is arbitrarily
> generated.  
> 
> To use a time stamp would require a parameter that is differently
> defined than the current RSID.

Excuse my persistance here, but: why?
Especially if they do not have to be sequential.

Is there any reason to define RSID as a counter instead of an increasing 
ID? When is a counter like 1-2-5-6 better than IDs like 
1234400000-1234500000-1234600000-12374700000?

-- 
Martin
_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog