Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:00:09 +0100 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Johann Kois <jkois@FreeBSD.org>, Niclas Zeising <lothrandil@n00b.apagnu.se>, doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml Message-ID: <20061112190008.GA7008@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <20061112182751.GB834@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <200611120013.kAC0D5GM097268@repoman.freebsd.org> <200611121144.28895.jkois@freebsd.org> <4556FE2A.1080501@n00b.apagnu.se> <20061112111431.GA84563@abigail.blackend.org> <20061112182751.GB834@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2006-11-13 05:27, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> wrote: >On Sun, 2006-Nov-12 12:14:31 +0100, Marc Fonvieille wrote: >> SSH is the protocol, and ssh is the application/program (so >> <application></application> or <command></command> according to the >> situation). > > To be pedantic, the application is OpenSSH. Well, right now, yes. But it is "a member of the family of applications which implement the `SSH' protocol". I am not saying that this can actually happen real soon now, but if OpenSSH doesn't work the way we want it to work, it is possible that our <application>SSH</application> in a few years will be <application>FooSSH</application>. When the 'Open' part of 'OpenSSH' is important, it is obligatory that we mention and make it stand out (if not for any other reason, as a form of our appreciation for the work of the OpenSSH folks). But when we talk about the 'SSH' protocol in general, do we really have to do so? - Giorgos
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061112190008.GA7008>