[Oisf-devel] removing unified1 output

[Matthew Jonkman]

I agree, there's no reason to use it as BY2 is more stable and maintained. 

Matt


On Oct 3, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Peter Manev wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Victor Julien <victor at inliniac.net> wrote:
> Hey ppl, is anyone opposed to us removing the unified1 output? We're
> going to do some refactoring of the output modules to fix bug #264. The
> lesser work we need to do the better.
> 
> Unified2 + Baryard2 seems to be far superior to unified1+barnyard, both
> in general and in the Suricata implementation. So I'm thinking we should
> remove unified1.
> 
> Objections? Opinions? +1's, -1's?
> 
> Cheers,
> Victor
> 
> --
> ---------------------------------------------
> Victor Julien
> http://www.inliniac.net/
> PGP: http://www.inliniac.net/victorjulien.asc
> ---------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Oisf-devel mailing list
> Oisf-devel at openinfosecfoundation.org
> http://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/oisf-devel
> 
> Nothing against removing it.....
> 
> -- 
> Peter Manev
> _______________________________________________
> Oisf-devel mailing list
> Oisf-devel at openinfosecfoundation.org
> http://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/oisf-devel


----------------------------------------------------
Matt Jonkman
Emerging Threats Pro
Open Information Security Foundation (OISF)
Phone 866-504-2523 x110
http://www.emergingthreatspro.com
http://www.openinfosecfoundation.org
----------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4364 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/pipermail/oisf-devel/attachments/20111003/0b897690/attachment.bin>