Subject: RE: [Syslog] #2, max message size

From: "Rainer Gerhards" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:42:32 +0100

Darren,

> The only place a message size limit should be specified is in 
> a transport
> mapping.  If it's in -15 then it should be removed.  Limits 
> of all sizes
> and types do nothing but contribute to aging of a protocol.

-protocol-15 is a compromise after a very long discussion. It says:

-----
   A receiver MUST be able to accept messages up to and including 480
   octets in length.  For interoperability reasons, all receiver
   implementations SHOULD be able to accept messages up to and including
   2,048 octets in length.

   If a receiver receives a message with a length larger than 2,048
   octets, or larger than it supports, the receiver MAY discard the
   message or truncate the payload.
-----

I think this text is useful. It keeps the door open for any size
messages while still allowing it to be restricted by the transport
mappings and individual implementations (e.g. on low-end embedded
devices). It cautions implementors against being too verbose but also
sets a lower limit that each implementation can assume to be received.

I think we should continue to use this text. Do you agree?

Rainer

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

---

From: Darren Reed <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 02:48:46 +1100 (EST)

> I think we should continue to use this text. Do you agree?

No.  That text doesn't belong in this draft.

Darren