Hi Francis, Please see inline. Cheers, Med -----Message d'origine----- De : Francis.Dupont@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Francis.Dupont@xxxxxxxxxx] Envoyé : jeudi 17 mars 2011 16:41 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP Cc : ietf@xxxxxxxx; IETF-Announce; int-area@xxxxxxxx Objet : Re: [Int-area] Last Call: <draft-ietf-intarea-server-logging-recommendations-02.txt> (Logging recommendations for Internet facing servers) to BCP In your previous mail you wrote: This is a late comment but I think it is worth raising it. => as the gen-art reviewer of the document I'd like to understand the comment. Med: To understand the issue, I recommend you the following reading: http://haproxy.1wt.eu/download/1.5/doc/proxy-protocol.txt This I-D recommends to log the source port number for internet-facing servers. But due to the presence of load-balancers in the path, the "original" source port may be lost. The source port number that will be passed to the target server may not be accurate and hence does not meet the initial requirment. => where are these load-balancers and as they perform a NAT function why they don't log mappings they create? Or if they are placed in front of servers why they are not integrated in the logging system? Med: You can make a quick search on the XFF practices in load-balances/proxies to see how it is used for logging purposes. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf