Re: [logs] RE: syslog/tcp (selp)

betat_private

2003-01-15T04:38:01 Rainer Gerhards:
> Honestly, I do not like to call it reliable as it is not fully
> reliable.

How so? TCP is reliable, no?

> RFC3195 is.

I'd expect RFC 3195 to be less reliable, until and unless we get a
simple and robust implementation of the appropriate subset of BEEP;
at least from what I've read on these lists, implementors looking
for BEEP libs are not always pleased with their choices.

> But SELP/SLP/RLP ;) is a simplex protocol, without any
> acknowledgment from the receiver (except for the TCP
> acknowledgment).

That TCP ack seems to me to be all that's needed.

> This has some inherent issues in it. Sure, it is much more
> reliable than syslog/udp, but not bullet proof (maybe 90% to 95%,
> which is not bad at all).

Could you describe the scenario in which the current selp.txt
proposal is unreliable?

-Bennett