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