Subject: [Syslog-sec] -protocol field names

From: "Rainer Gerhards" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:12:40 +0100

Hi list,

I am giving -protocol (hopefully) the finishing touches. As far as I
see, there is one issue outstanding, and this is "just" about field
names.

It is about SENDER-NAME and SENDER-INST. Anton Okmianski recommended
off-list that they are renamed to "APP-NAME" and "PROCESS" because this
is what actually will be the contents of these fields in almost all
cases. I prefer, however, the more generic names, because SENDER-INST
may not always (and not necessarily) contain a PROCESS ID. The same is
for SENDER-NAME, which must not always (at least in my point of view) be
an application name. I agree to Anton that these cases are actually the
vast majority of cases. But I would not like to outrule the few other
cases.

I think neither Anton nor me are very pushy for the field names. But I
would appreciate some feedback from the list so that we can finish this,
too, up. Anton, please feel free to add comments if you think I missed
some of your important arguments - if so, that was not by intension ;)

Thank you to everyone,
Rainer
_______________________________________________
Syslog-sec mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.employees.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog-sec