Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- From: "Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:42:51 -0400
David Lang wrote:
I'm actually trying to keep filters out of the path (until the data hits the primary archive, after it's there, copies can (and will be) filtered like crazy)
Is that a specific requirement for some legal reason or something? It seems
somewhat, um, arbitrary.
You might prefer taking a look at minirsyslog - it's got zero processing options
and just slams stuff to disk without doing anything fancy at all. You'll still have
the problem that you're going to need a separate input / processing loop
and, to me, it just makes more sense to inline all that stuff.
I actually have been trying syslog-ng and am horribly disappointed with it's performance,
Well, it could be worse! It could use BEEP. ;) But, yes, I agree, syslog-ng is
very "feature rich"
mjr.
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- From: ArkanoiD
- Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- From: David Lang
- Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- References:
- Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- From: Marcus J. Ranum
- Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- From: David Lang
- Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- Prev by Date: Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- Next by Date: Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- Previous by thread: Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- Next by thread: Re: [fw-wiz] Appropriate PIX logging level
- Index(es):