Chris's Wiki :: blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssue Commentshttps://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssue?atomcommentsDWiki2008-08-04T19:20:27ZRecent comments in Chris's Wiki :: blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssue.By Chris Siebenmann on /blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssuetag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssue:23d7f95c2dc5fc850e5bd29fa37996df2c0feb23Chris Siebenmann<div class="wikitext"><p>I think that TLS-based transports are okay (even good) for ordinary syslog
messages, but not exactly as simple as I would like for emergency messages
that may be the last thing you get before a machine goes down; there's a
lot of code (and state) involved in that process.</p>
</div>2008-08-04T19:20:27ZFrom 83.145.204.27 on /blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssuetag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/SyslogFsyncIssue:f7492d227fae4309cb8e67aae62c01997d34d8cfFrom 83.145.204.27<div class="wikitext"><p>Just a footnote-like comment about the central remote syslog server idea: IETF is working on a new standard for this, the main new feature being TLS transports instead of the current de facto UDP.[1] I personally look forward to this since I have always been somewhat cautious when doing remote syslog'ing in (partially) untrusted local area networks.</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Jukka.</p>
<p>[1] <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/syslog/">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/syslog/</a></p>
</div>2008-08-04T07:45:19Z