From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 31 22:47:16 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1A7616A4CE for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:47:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from green.rahul.net (green.rahul.net [192.160.13.49]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9F2B43D45 for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:47:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from conover@rahul.net) Received: from green.rahul.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by green.rahul.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 6EAE4BE8C2 for ; Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:47:14 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 16693 invoked by uid 4199); 31 Dec 2004 22:46:13 -0000 Date: 31 Dec 2004 22:46:13 -0000 Message-ID: <20041231224613.16692.qmail@rahul.net> To: Robin Becker In-Reply-To: <41D724CF.6020404@jessikat.fsnet.co.uk> References: <41D724CF.6020404@jessikat.fsnet.co.uk> From: conover@rahul.net (John Conover) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ssh protocol in 5.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: John Conover List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 22:47:16 -0000 >From 5.3 do ssh -1 mylog@myhost.com. You can also set a protocol, 1 or 2, in the ssh configs, either globally in /etc/ssh ... or ~/.ssh/config. You can also use both, at the same time. ~/.ssh/known_hosts and ~/.ssh/authorized_keys can have both protocol 1 and 2 records in the same file; the identity files are different for 1 an 2, but have different file names in 1 and 2, so can coexist in ~/.ssh. John Robin Becker writes: > I have just upgraded one of my systems from 4.9 to 5.3 and even after > restoring my old .ssh folder it seems I cannot get ssh on a 4.9 system > to use protocol 1 with the 5.3 system. > > Am I being stupid or must I go through the pain of creating a whole new > set of keys for protocol 2. > > We use protocol 1 for legacy reasons ie we have a very old > implementation of ssh on our win32 PCs. > -- John Conover, conover@rahul.net, http://www.johncon.com/