Hi,

Because of dependency and clarity, i thing rsync collector is better option too.

There is no reason for implementation file deletion in rsync-collector. Condition of fast rsync is existing similar file.

Rsync copy only differences, so updating is really fast. But rsync-collector send to parser whole file.

Best regards

Ondřej Schindler

---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 17:35:28 +0200 Sebastian Wagner <wagner@cert.at> wrote ----

Hi,
Does that the addition add support for `rsync://` filenames? Does it also implement file deletion (which is a feature of the file collector)? While I think that this could be quite easy, it may add another dependency to the file collector. If rsync-specific parameters emerge or rsync-specific features are added, I'd vote for a separate collector for clarity.
As I user I might expect that the collector only collects the differences to the previous fetch of the file? As that might be harder to implement, I think that a basic rsync-path support can be added to the file collector. But depends on how much features you actually want to implement.
Sebastian

On 2018-08-02 18:50, Ondřej Schindler wrote:
-- 
// Sebastian Wagner <wagner@cert.at> - T: +43 1 5056416 7201
// CERT Austria - https://www.cert.at/
// Eine Initiative der nic.at GmbH - https://www.nic.at/
// Firmenbuchnummer 172568b, LG Salzburg
Hi,

i write these email, because i have to simply question, please. I want to add rsync collector to intelmq. Should i modify file collector (it would be max 5 lines of code) or should i create new collector?

Best regards
Ondřej Schindler
_______________________________________________
Intelmq-dev mailing list
Intelmq-dev@lists.cert.at
https://lists.cert.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/intelmq-dev