|
|||||||||||
|
RE: Better Syslog server
From: Ivanov, Vladimir <VIvanov(at)tee.toshiba.de>
Date: Mon Mar 24 2003 - 04:36:47 EST
> I disagree on the first point - SNMP's network protocol is yucky, the
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,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 14:01:37 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||