Talk:Syslog

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Syslog article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 12 months

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

About Patents

It has been some years ago that the patent claims were raised. What has happend since? Were they settled or abandoned? --84.154.98.205 (talk) 11:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The wording of the references to patent claims (plural), seem a bit misleading actually: "At different points in time, various companies have attempted patent claims on syslog.[2][3][4]". All three of those references are to the same, apparently bogus patent claim and that only had to do with sending syslog over TLS as far as I can tell. I haven't done enough research to confirm that they were indeed the only patent claim made and the status thereof, but I would sure like to see the wording of this clarified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josdon (talk • contribs) 16:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added some qualifying words to indicate claims are of limited scope. Some of these patents may have now expired by now. ~Kvng (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links

No longer in article ~Kvng (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Small Syslog Server link has been added & removed repeatedly. Should it stay or should it go? Any comments?

This promotional link which advertises a nonfree server that isn't the subject of this article has recently been spammed across multiple Wikipedias by a very determined spammer. If it continues I will probably request that the link be blacklisted. See WikiProject Spam link report. Them From Space 19:46, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The link Syslog server installation on Debian leads to something that installs some sort of pretty syslog thing on Debian and is NOT about installing a normal syslog server which is part of all modern unixen. Being so misleading I propose this link be removed.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

SANS paper

The SANS paper mentioned in the external link explicitly states:

Reposting is not permitted without express written permission.
— SANS Institute, The Ins and Outs of System Logging Using Syslog, p. 1

This may be an issue here. #!/bin/DokReggar -talk 10:19, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Syslog or syslog?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5424 uses syslog. But wiki uses Syslog? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben7015 (talk • contribs) 04:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's only written Syslog in the start of sentences, not in the middle of them. RFC5424 uses the same format, capitalization following english standard. TuxyQ ^{(talk|contrib)} 19:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{lowercase title}} treatment. ~Kvng (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Limitations

The "Limitations" part seems not to be accurate and considers a specific usage of the protocol, without clearly stating it and without considering the others. For instance, syslog is not based on the UDP transport protocol but on the TLS protocol. UDP is just supported but not advised by RFC5424. The others limitations are more based on the configuration of tools using syslog rather than on the definition of the protocol itself. Moreover, this section is not written in an encyclopaedic way.

I would therefore advise this section to be corrected as soon as possible or otherwise deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silmilia (talk • contribs) 11:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UDP is no longer mentioned in Limitations section. ~Kvng (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HN

[1] Discussion thread about an article about the protocol, that makes the article sound possibly worth using here. I haven't looked at it much yet. 173.228.123.207 (talk) 01:24, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a reliable source ~Kvng (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Only for Unix?

Isn't it only for Unix-like operating systems (e.g, not for Windows)?

It could be clearer, e.g. in the beginning of the article.

Conversely, if it is not only for Unix-like operating systems, that could be clearer.

--Mortense (talk) 10:21, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]