RE: Better Syslog server

• Previous message: Hal Flynn: "SecurityFocus Article Announcement"
• Maybe in reply to: Matt Harris: "Better Syslog server"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:36:47 +0100
From: "Ivanov, Vladimir" <VIvanov@tee.toshiba.de>
To: <mdh@unix.si.edu>

Hi,

> I disagree on the first point - SNMP's network protocol is yucky, the
> programming API's are no better, and all in all it seems to make less
> sense, considering the applications that deal with it such as openview
> are also cryptic and a pain in the neck.

Yes, SNMP is more complex than syslog. Not because SNMP is complex
itself, but because syslog is trivial. None force you to use HPOV -
there are pleny of other tools (like, SMC http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/sunmanagementcenter/faq/snmp.html --
we are in "focus-sun" :) ) -- but in the enterprise environment it is
usually makes sence to have a single point of control -- and SNMP is
better for this.

I mean that doing syslog() should initiate SNMP trap, so about what API
change are you talking? What could be easer, than syslog()?
(Okay, I don't mean Ultrix :) )

If syslog could initiate a SNMP trap instead of or in addition to the
usual logging, there will be no change for applications' programmers.

Best regards,
Vladimir

• Previous message: Hal Flynn: "SecurityFocus Article Announcement"
• Maybe in reply to: Matt Harris: "Better Syslog server"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]