Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Appropriate PIX logging level
From: ArkanoiD <ark () eltex net>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 12:57:45 +0400
nuqneH, On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 10:24:31AM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote:
ArkanoiD wrote:Well, does that mean that syslog should be either not reliable (generic datagram), not portable enough (sdsc), buggy (nsyslogd) or suffering performance problems (ng) ;-)?You can get reliable logging with a stock BSD-flavor syslogd if you talk to it via a named pipe (ie, /var/run/log or equivalent).
No, BSD syslog is not reliable since it is datagram socket. And there still is no reliable kernel logging at all. _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level, (continued)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level David Lang (May 02)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Marcus J. Ranum (May 02)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level David Lang (May 02)
- minirsyslogd (was Appropriate PIX logging level) Bennett Todd (May 04)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level ArkanoiD (May 04)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Marcus J. Ranum (May 04)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level ArkanoiD (May 04)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Marcus J. Ranum (May 04)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Brian Loe (May 05)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Marcus J. Ranum (May 02)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Chuck Swiger (May 05)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level ArkanoiD (May 05)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Chuck Swiger (May 05)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level ArkanoiD (May 05)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level David Lang (May 02)
- RE: Appropriate PIX logging level David Lang (May 04)
- Re: Appropriate PIX logging level Tichomir Kotek (May 05)