openssh unix dev - May 2002 - Feature request: Discussion.

I was wondering if anyone would find the syntax:
ssh://someuser at host#port or even as simple as ssh://somehost#port
useful? 

-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin at coremetrics.com

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and 
try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. 
But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will 
reduce the danger by half."
Sir Winston Churchill
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url :
http://lists.mindrot.org/pipermail/openssh-unix-dev/attachments/20020509/6a46d8f4/attachment.bin

Considering # is a shell comment character.. No..

And in reality if your using URL formating you really should be
doing ssh://user at host:port   which conflicts with scp, but without
knowing what you are planning.. It may not make a difference.

- Ben

On 9 May 2002, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone would find the syntax:
> ssh://someuser at host#port or even as simple as ssh://somehost#port
> useful?
>
> --
> Austin Gonyou
> Systems Architect, CCNA
> Coremetrics, Inc.
> Phone: 512-698-7250
> email: austin at coremetrics.com
>
> "One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and
> try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger.
> But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will
> reduce the danger by half."
> Sir Winston Churchill
>

Ben Lindstrom wrote:
> 
> Considering # is a shell comment character.. No..
> 
> And in reality if your using URL formating you really should be
> doing ssh://user at host:port   which conflicts with scp, but without
> knowing what you are planning.. It may not make a difference.
How so?  Scp would simply use the second : if the first consisted only
of a number.  The only issue I can see is if you wanted to transfer to a
remote directory containing a : on the remote server...

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                 abartlet at pcug.org.au
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team  abartlet at samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College   abartlet at hawkerc.net
http://samba.org     http://build.samba.org     http://hawkerc.net

On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 04:23:18PM -0500, Austin Gonyou
wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone would find the syntax:
> ssh://someuser at host#port or even as simple as ssh://somehost#port
> useful? 
i don't like this. scp uses rcp syntax not the (ugly) url syntax.

Ultimately you can write a wrapper that implements ssh urls if you really
care...

Nico
--  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob McCauley [mailto:robmccau at RadOnc.Duke.EDU]
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 12:17 PM
> To: ewheeler at kaico.com
> Cc: OpenSSH Devel List
> Subject: Re: Feature request: Discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say that the best reason not to add it is lack of a 
> compelling reason
> *to* add it.  ssh is not http.  I don't see any good reason 
> to make scp or
> ssh try to look like http, and I have to agree with Markus Friedl's
> assessment that url syntax lacks something in the aesthetics
> department.  I'd never use it.
> 
> I don't like the idea of supporting a password in the command line at
> all.  I can ignore the url syntax, but the thoughts of 
> enabling my users
> to create rsh like aliases with plaintext passwords embedded 
> in them would
> be unacceptable.  You have to know that given the choice, 
> most would opt
> to do that rather than configure public key authentication.
> 
> I just received a reply to this same message saying FTP 
> supports passwords
> on the command line, so we may as well support it.  I disagree.  FTP
> supports lots of evil things.  Let's support the core functionality
> securely.  Passwords in the command line is just an invitation for Bad
> Things to happen.  There's some enhanced risk, and I see no benefit.
> 
> Rob
> 
> -- 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> Rob McCauley
> Radiation Oncology
> Duke University Medical Center
> 
> On Mon, 13 May 2002 ewheeler at kaico.com wrote:
> 
> > I agree that we shouldn't add the 'ssh://' since we're
> trying to keep r*
> > compatibility, but is there a reason that a 
> > '--url 
> ssh://someones:password at somehoston#thisport/some/file' could/should
> > not be added?  I suppose --url could simply override the 
> source for the
> > scp.  Ideas?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org mailing list
> http://www.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
> 
Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com

This message contains confidential information and is intended only 
for the individual named.  If you are not the named addressee you 
should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.  Please 
notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this 
e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.

E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free 
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, 
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.  The sender therefore 
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents 
of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.  If 
verification is required please request a hard-copy version.  This 
message is provided for informational purposes and should not be 
construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or 
related financial instruments.