RE: [Syslog] Alarm MIB in syslog-protocol

[Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>]

Hi Sharon,

It's an important concept but I feel that it is underspecified and 
ambiguous in the current document.  The recipent of a message with the 
Severity of Notice would not be able to tell if the sender intended for it 
to be the ITU alarm of Indeterminate or Cleared.  I believe that this part 
was specified before the concept of Structured Data was included in 
syslog-protocol.  Using Structured Data would disambiguate the intention.

Thanks,
Chris


On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Sharon Chisholm wrote:

> Hi
>
> This is an important section (and no, I'm not just saying that because I
> co-authored RFC 3877). It provides the mapping between severities in
> alarms sent via SNMP and those logged in syslog. Removing it means that
> implementations will all have different mappings.
>
> Sharon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Lonvick [mailto:clonvick@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 12:34 PM
> To: syslog@ietf.org
> Subject: [Syslog] Alarm MIB in syslog-protocol
>
> Hi,
>
> In David Harrington's review of syslog-protocol-17
>   http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/syslog/current/msg01145.html
> he asked about the Alarm MIB - Section 6.2.1.1 (from RFC3877).  We
> discussed this a while ago and it doesn't seem that there is a good fit
> between the historical syslog severities and the Alarm MIBs.  I've asked
> Rainer to remove this.  Anyone interested is hereby encouraged to write
> a document that specifies how to display the Alarm MIBs as Structured
> Data.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> Syslog@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
>
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> Syslog@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog

_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog