From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 13 22:35:25 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735E616A4E8; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 22:35:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: from igloo.linux.gr (igloo.linux.gr [62.1.205.36]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF6743D5D; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 22:30:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: from kobe.laptop ([195.167.26.18]) (authenticated bits=128) by igloo.linux.gr (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-2) with ESMTP id kADMTrox015598 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:30:08 +0200 Received: from kobe.laptop (kobe.laptop [127.0.0.1]) by kobe.laptop (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kADMSDAC002317; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:28:43 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: (from keramida@localhost) by kobe.laptop (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id kADMRgx8002296; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:27:42 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:27:42 +0100 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Niclas Zeising Message-ID: <20061113222742.GB1634@kobe.laptop> 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> <20061112190008.GA7008@kobe.laptop> <45578E57.3070006@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45578E57.3070006@gmail.com> X-Hellug-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Hellug-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.348, required 5, AWL 0.05, BAYES_00 -2.60, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE 0.20, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 0.00) X-Hellug-MailScanner-From: keramida@freebsd.org X-Spam-Status: No Cc: cvs-doc@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Johann Kois , doc-committers@freebsd.org, Marc Fonvieille Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 22:35:25 -0000 On 2006-11-12 22:12, Niclas Zeising wrote: >Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >>On 2006-11-13 05:27, Peter Jeremy wrote: >>>On Sun, 2006-Nov-12 12:14:31 +0100, Marc Fonvieille wrote: >>>> SSH is the protocol, and ssh is the application/program (so >>>> or 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 SSH >> in a few years will be FooSSH. >> >> 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? > > This chapter, as far as I can tell, talks about SSH in general, as > Giorgos stated. There is another chapter talking about OpenSSH in > particular, and in that chapter OpenSSH is used when talking about the > application. Excellent! I'm glad we got that straight :) So, Niclas, just to get this thread directed towards a more productive closure, in a previous post of yours you wrote: % Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 12:22:53 +0100 % From: Niclas Zeising % Subject: Re: cvs commit: % doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml % To: Marc Fonvieille % CC: Johann Kois , doc-committers@freebsd.org, % Giorgos Keramidas , cvs-all@freebsd.org, % cvs-doc@freebsd.org % % Okay. I'll do an overhaul of the security chapter and see if I can make % some sort of progress regarding consistency between, SSH, ssh and so on, % using SSH for the protocol, and ssh or % ssh depending on the situation. Should we expect a patch for the SSH stuff? If you are going to work on this, it would be nice to know, so we avoid duplication of work by 2 or more prople for the same relatively trivial change. - Giorgos