Information: Forum is in read-only mode
For details and other support options see

error msg without explanation...

Support, Question and Discussions on the UNIX-like logger tool for Windows.

Moderator: alorbach

Google Ads

error msg without explanation...

Postby lvth » Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:42 pm

Hi, I'm trying Winsyslog/Eventreporter/logger in a new server environment, with most W2k3 and a few RedHat AS/Fedora.
I've installed Winsyslog on the server (A) that should collect all logs, where I want all filtering/logging/etc to take place. On that same machine (A) I'm running the interactive syslog viewer. I got many syslog lines from the very same machine (A), just a few (3-4) from one (B) of the servers (W2k3 + Snare agent: UDP 514), not more from a second (C) one (W2k3 + EventReporter sending all events on udp 514 to A), a few from fedora (using std syslog D). Just to test for connectivity and/or config I've tryed logerr on (A), sending a message to (A), but it never went thru. If logger uses -m 3195raw I get a msg: "Couldn't connect to host, sock err 10061". What I'm missing?
Thanks in advance for any help (or pointer to) you can provide.
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: error msg without explanation...

Postby alorbach » Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:04 pm

Hi Luigi,

this is difficult to say without more details. Please use our customer support at and attack your current WinSyslog configuration as registry file. Then our support can take a look to it and help you to solve this issue.

best regards,
Andre Lorbach
Site Admin
Posts: 1627
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 11:55 am

Re: error msg without explanation...

Postby rgerhards » Wed Oct 22, 2008 4:08 pm

well, the logger issue actually is simple to solve, it is just an uncommon switch that Andre overlooked ;) The -m 3195 means that RFC3195/raw transmission is used. I guess you do not have configured any syslog server to use that. So if you really (really?) intend to use 3195, you need to enable that in the receiver. I'd just caution against using it, because nobody has done so in the past 5 years so it probably has a number of bugs. I suggest plain tcp instead... (I am not saying it doesn't work, I am just saying there is some risk with that unproven code, even though it passes all internal tests...).

Site Admin
Posts: 3807
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 11:57 am

Google Ads

Return to Adiscon Logger

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests