Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.utell.co.uk!usenet
From: brian@shift.utell.net (Brian Somers)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: syslogd watching other machine(s)
Date: 7 Apr 1997 13:05:47 GMT
Organization: Awfulhak Ltd.
Message-ID: <5iarfb$epc@ui-gate.utell.co.uk>
References: <5i7bo6$o1t$1@kayrad.ziplink.net>
Reply-To: brian@awfulhak.org, brian@utell.co.uk
NNTP-Posting-Host: shift.utell.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.8
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Lines: 36
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:38668
In article <5i7bo6$o1t$1@kayrad.ziplink.net>,
mi@ALDAN.ziplink.net..remove-after-`net' (Mikhail Teterin) writes:
> Hi! I have several Unix machines (FreeBSD and Irix), which I'd like
> to set up to watch for other machine's log entries. Say, rtfm will
> log aldan's messages and aldan will log rtfm's messages.
>
> Unfortunately, simply modifying /etc/syslogd.conf to send things to
> @another_host on both system, causes cascades of messages: rtfm sends
> the message to aldan, which bounces it back to rtfm right away.
> Then, rtfm passes it to aldan again, and so on... syslogd has to be
> restarted...
>
> The only solution I see for this, is to run two syslogd-s on each machine.
> With different config files. One will send local messages out (run in
> "safe" mode), another one -- logging remote messages.
>
> Can anyone think of a single process solution? Thanks!
>
> I think, syslogd has to have an option to operate in intelligent
> mode -- recognise when the incoming message is about the localhost
> and not log it (or, at least, not propagate it).
>
> -mi
The problem with the two-process thing is that currently, I expect
syslog will only write to the remote port that it listens to locally.
I think a "[port]@machine" option for the config file would solve
this - you'd still need two syslogd processes.
Does anyone on hackers (cc'd there) have any comments/observations ?
--
Brian <brian@awfulhak.org> <brian@freebsd.org>
<http://www.awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !