From sacadmin Thu Jun 17 14:37:37 2004 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:36:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Darren J Moffat To: PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: "ssh-iteam@sun.com"@borg.sfbay.sun.com Subject: ssh_config(4) option compatibility [PSARC/2004/505 Timeout: 06/24/2004] Content-Length: 4261 Subject: PSARC FastTrack [06/24/2004]: ssh_config(4) option compatibility Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase %I% %G% SMI This information is Copyright 2004 Sun Microsystems, Inc. 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: ssh_config(4) option compatibility 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: Nicolas Williams 1.3 Date of This Document: 17 June, 2004 4. Technical Description I'm submitting this case for Nicolas Williams the time out is 2004-06-24. The requested release binding is patch. The ssh_config(4) file is Evolving, this case is about a set of changes that may help bring it up to Stable. This case does not assert that ssh_config(4) become Stable at this time. The taxonomy of the new options is Evolving. ABSTRACT -------- This case concerns ssh(1)'s behaviour in the face of unknown configuration options. It's been recently discovered that the current behaviour (exit with an error message) makes per-user ssh configuration files (see ssh(1) and ssh_config(4)) not extensible in compatible ways. This behaviour is inherited from OpenSSH and exists ostensibly to prevent mis-spelling and other errors from causing security problems. This behaviour affects compatibility between SUNWssh versions as well as between all versions and derivatives of OpenSSH which share the per-user configuration file path "~/.ssh/config" and a solution is badly needed. PROPOSAL -------- We note that the OpenSSH team feels free to add new ssh_config(4) parameters at any time, thus refraining from adding parameters to ssh_config(4) is not an option. Silently ignoring unknown parameters is not an option either since this can cause users to assume that ssh(1) understood a given parameter when it didn't. Neither is prompting about unknown parameters appealing. Therefore we propose to make ssh(1) support a mechanism by which to inform it of parameters known to other versions of ssh(1) which can then be safely ignored by it: - Add a new ssh_config(4) ssh configuration parameter called 'IgnoreIfUnknown' whose value(s) is(are) comma-separated lists of configuration parameter names. Man page text: IgnoreIfUnknown Specifies a comma-separated list of ssh_config(4) parameters which, if unknown to ssh(1) are to be ignored by ssh(1). Multiple values for this parameter may be given; ssh(1) will honor the combined lists. This parameter is primarily intended to be used in the system-wide ssh_config(4), though it may also be used in the per-user ssh_config(4) (~/.ssh/config) files. - Add a new ssh_config(4) ssh configuration parameter called 'DontIgnoreIfUnknown' whose value(s) is(are) comma-separated lists of configuration parameter names which must not be ignored by ssh(1)'s which do not understand them. This parameter overrides 'IgnoreIfUnknown'. Man page text: DontIgnoreIfUnknown Specifies a comma-separated list of ssh_config(4) parameters which must not be ignored by ssh(1) if it does not support them. Multiple values for this parameter may be given; ssh(1) will honor the combined lists. This parameter is primarily intended to be used in the per-user ssh_config(4) (~/.ssh/config) files. - Whenever new ssh_config(4) configuration parameters are added in micro/patch releases the release notes will document the need to update /etc/ssh/ssh_config on older systems to add the new parameters to the IgnoreIfUnknown lists. - Whenever new ssh_config(4) configuration parameters are added a patch should be considered for previous minor releases to update IgnoreIfUnknown in /etc/ssh/ssh_config. - Support for IgnoreIfUnknown should be backported to SUNWssh 1.0.x (Solaris 9's ssh). - Sun will contribute patches to OpenSSH for this new option. The OpenSSH team doesn't seem to want to commit to any solution; typically they don't like to commit to adding support for any user requested features unless patches are included. REFERENCES ---------- http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=866 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: ON 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack From sacadmin Wed Jun 30 13:35:20 2004 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:34:31 -0400 From: James Carlson To: PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: Darren J Moffat , ssh-iteam@sun.com Subject: Re: ssh_config(4) option compatibility [PSARC/2004/505 Timeout: 06/24/2004] Content-Length: 390 This fast-track request was approved during ARC business at the 06/23/2004 meeting. A copy of the specification has been placed in the case directory as 'spec.txt'. -- James Carlson, IP Systems Group Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.234W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.497N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From sacadmin Thu Jul 15 10:18:24 2004 Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:14:30 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams To: James Carlson Cc: PSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Darren J Moffat , ssh-iteam@Sun.COM Subject: Re: ssh_config(4) option compatibility [PSARC/2004/505 Timeout: 06/24/2004] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Content-Length: 445 Implementation experience has shown that whitespace must be allowed as a separator character, not just commas, for the value list for these IgnoreIfUnknown and DontIgnoreIfUnknown config parameters. Nico -- On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 04:34:31PM -0400, James Carlson wrote: > This fast-track request was approved during ARC business at the > 06/23/2004 meeting. A copy of the specification has been placed in > the case directory as 'spec.txt'. From sacadmin Wed Sep 26 02:09:55 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l8Q99tPI001039 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:09:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l8Q96qBV011352 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc@sun.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JOY00I0TXBGXO00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JOY008BPXBDRBA0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:06:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-2-fe2.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.11]) by gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l8Q96njH006022 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:06:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JOY00C01WGTJQ00@fe-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Jan.Pechanec@Sun.COM) for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:06:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from fossa.czech.sun.com ([129.157.71.113]) by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JOY00JK6XB3PCD0@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:06:39 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:05:44 +0200 (CEST) From: Jan Pechanec Subject: ad PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility Sender: Jan.Pechanec@sun.com X-X-Sender: jp161948@fossa.czech.sun.com To: psarc@sun.com Cc: Nicolas Williams Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 1557 hi, this case was filed by Nico and I was to take it over now and implement it. However, it looks to me that only 1/2 of it is needed and Nico also agrees. My question is - what to do? Can I just change it and file it again, or can changes be approved on this alias, or shall I close it and file a new case? technical info: IgnoreIfUnknown is fine, DontIgnoreIfUknown is not needed. Unknown options are not ignored by default so this could be used only to overrule what is in IgnoreIfUnknown. Well, it's just much better to change IgnoreIfUnknown to avoid confusion and mistakes. there might be 2 situations where DontIgnoreIfUknown could be useful. (1) if admin could set DontIgnoreIfUknown in /etc/ssh/ssh_config to prevent users to ignore some options set per user in IgnoreIfUnknown (DontIgnoreIfUnknown is of higher priority). This can't work since any ssh(1)'s option can be overridden on the command line so this usage can't be achieved now. We can't have options to use only in the system wide config file. (2) using wildcards - IgnoreIfUnknown=* and then use DontIgnoreIfUknown for those that are not be ignored. However, using wildcards leads exactly to the situation we wanted to avoid - where important options might be misspelled and then silently ignored which is not good at all. The PSARC case didn't mention wild cards anyway. given this, we should implement IgnoreIfUnknown only. If needed from any reason, DontIgnoreIfUknown can be added and it would just an extension. thanks, Jan. -- Jan Pechanec From sacadmin Wed Sep 26 15:50:33 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l8QMoWrn028063 for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:50:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l8QMl7ir027688; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:47:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JOZ00J01ZAZNH00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JOZ00B7SZAZRCA0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.11.145] (sr1-jurassic-02.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.145]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8QMlNYG556213; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:47:23 -0700 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: ad PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility In-reply-to: To: Jan Pechanec Cc: psarc@sun.com, Nicolas Williams Reply-to: Joseph.Kowalski@sun.com Message-id: <46FAE17B.7070806@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061110) Status: RO Content-Length: 691 Jan Pechanec wrote: > hi, > > this case was filed by Nico and I was to take it over now and > implement it. However, it looks to me that only 1/2 of it is needed and Nico > also agrees. My question is - what to do? Can I just change it and file it > again, or can changes be approved on this alias, or shall I close it and > file a new case? > Technically, you file a new case (fast-track) and change the old case to "closed superceed ". However, that seems like too much work. I'd suggest just change the old case, send mail and change the status to "waiting need fast-track ". From that point, its just fast-track and should be approved next Wednesday. - jek3 From sacadmin Mon Oct 1 21:13:51 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l924DoZw012064 for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:13:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l924AQ69023092 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc@sun.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 12:10:42 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JP900I01NLSYE00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:10:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JP9007BPNLRZTC0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:10:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l924Ab7i015876; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l924CMKM029660; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:12:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id l924CMF0029659; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:12:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:12:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: ad PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility To: Jan.Pechanec@sun.com, Joseph.Kowalski@sun.com Cc: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com, psarc@sun.com Message-id: <200710020412.l924CMF0029659@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 952 > Jan Pechanec wrote: > > hi, > > > > this case was filed by Nico and I was to take it over now and > > implement it. However, it looks to me that only 1/2 of it is needed and Nico > > also agrees. My question is - what to do? Can I just change it and file it > > again, or can changes be approved on this alias, or shall I close it and > > file a new case? > > > Technically, you file a new case (fast-track) and change the old case to > "closed superceed ". > > However, that seems like too much work. > > I'd suggest just change the old case, send mail and change the status to > "waiting need fast-track ". From that point, its just fast-track > and should be approved next Wednesday. Is someone going to follow Joe's advice? For example the original case owner? Or is there going to be a new case to modify this one? Gary.. P.S. What was implemented? I'd guessed nothing had yet been putback, is that correct? From sacadmin Mon Oct 1 21:54:21 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l924sLY1013110 for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l924oFHk053588; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:50:16 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JP900601PHBWI00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:51:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM ([129.153.128.104]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JP900JRLPHARR90@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:51:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l924p9Vr017494; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 23:51:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l924p9wa017493; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 23:51:09 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 23:51:09 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: ad PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility In-reply-to: <200710020412.l924CMF0029659@marduk.eng.sun.com> To: Gary Winiger Cc: Jan.Pechanec@sun.com, Joseph.Kowalski@sun.com, psarc@sun.com Message-id: <20071002045109.GR11376@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200710020412.l924CMF0029659@marduk.eng.sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 402 On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:12:22PM -0700, Gary Winiger wrote: > Is someone going to follow Joe's advice? For example the > original case owner? Or is there going to be a new case > to modify this one? Jan has pinged Darren to follow through on Joe's advice. > Gary.. > P.S. What was implemented? I'd guessed nothing had yet been putback, > is that correct? Nothing has been implemented yet. From sacadmin Mon Oct 1 22:03:37 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l9253b0V013465 for ; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:03:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l9250Tbt021257 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc@sun.com>; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:00:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JP900K0BPWUK300@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Mon, 01 Oct 2007 23:00:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JP900HAYPWTPZ00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Mon, 01 Oct 2007 23:00:29 -0600 (MDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l9250ReR028558; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9252BAF029978; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id l9252B9D029977; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:02:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: ad PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility To: gww@eng.sun.com, Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Cc: Jan.Pechanec@sun.com, Joseph.Kowalski@sun.com, psarc@sun.com Message-id: <200710020502.l9252B9D029977@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 535 > On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:12:22PM -0700, Gary Winiger wrote: > > Is someone going to follow Joe's advice? For example the > > original case owner? Or is there going to be a new case > > to modify this one? > > Jan has pinged Darren to follow through on Joe's advice. > > > Gary.. > > P.S. What was implemented? I'd guessed nothing had yet been putback, > > is that correct? > > Nothing has been implemented yet. OK to both. Seems like a no-brainer. Thanks for Jan and you bringing it to the cases attention. Gary.. From sacadmin Tue Oct 2 01:35:05 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l928Z4A2022528 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l928VmYu006209 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc@sun.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 09:31:56 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JP900A03ZP6RK00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JP9002TKZP4OP20@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:31:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-10.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-2-fe1.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l928Vqvp027509 for ; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 08:31:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-10.sun.com by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JP900K01YH2S000@fe-emea-10.sun.com> (original mail from Jan.Pechanec@Sun.COM) for psarc@sun.com (ORCPT psarc@sun.com); Tue, 02 Oct 2007 09:31:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from fossa.czech.sun.com ([129.157.71.113]) by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JP9003X5ZOTG790@fe-emea-10.sun.com>; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 09:31:42 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 10:30:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Jan Pechanec Subject: Re: ad PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility In-reply-to: <200710020502.l9252B9D029977@marduk.eng.sun.com> Sender: Jan.Pechanec@sun.com X-X-Sender: jp161948@fossa.czech.sun.com To: Gary Winiger Cc: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com, Joseph.Kowalski@sun.com, psarc@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200710020502.l9252B9D029977@marduk.eng.sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 725 On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Gary Winiger wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:12:22PM -0700, Gary Winiger wrote: >> > Is someone going to follow Joe's advice? For example the >> > original case owner? Or is there going to be a new case >> > to modify this one? >> >> Jan has pinged Darren to follow through on Joe's advice. >> >> > Gary.. >> > P.S. What was implemented? I'd guessed nothing had yet been putback, >> > is that correct? >> >> Nothing has been implemented yet. > > OK to both. Seems like a no-brainer. Thanks for Jan and you bringing > it to the cases attention. hi Gary, Darren is travelling and finishing ZFS alpha release binaries now so that's why it wasn't sponsored yet. Jan. -- Jan Pechanec From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Wed Oct 3 04:46:22 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l93BkLJl020305 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 04:46:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l93Bh4DA010268; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 12:43:10 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JPC00B2D37WBZ00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:43:08 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JPC006C337U8330@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:43:07 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-2-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.12]) by gmp-eb-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l93Bh6cH003189; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:43:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JPC0080132OBT00@fe-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:43:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.21] by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JPC004E637FJ810@fe-emea-09.sun.com>; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:42:52 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 12:42:51 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: [reopened] PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: PSARC-EXT@sun.com Cc: ssh-iteam@sun.com Message-id: <4703803B.3060904@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070731) Status: RO Content-Length: 286 I'm re-opening this case to update the spec as discussed in the mail log. The only architectural change removes the unneeded DontIgnoreIfUnknown option. The updated spec also uses the current interface taxonomy. I've set the timer to expire 10th October 2007. -- Darren J Moffat From Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM Wed Oct 3 10:12:51 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l93HCpMg001594 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l93H9gEZ017556; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JPC00D09IC5XR00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.6.24]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JPC007VLIC4L070@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-10.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-2-fe2.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.11]) by gmp-eb-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l93H9eWO007608; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:09:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-10.sun.com by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JPC00901I8TQS00@fe-emea-10.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Wed, 03 Oct 2007 18:09:40 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.21] by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JPC00CP9IC3D120@fe-emea-10.sun.com>; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 18:09:40 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 18:09:39 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: [closed approved (again!)] PSARC/2004/505 ssh_config(4) option compatibility Sender: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM To: PSARC-EXT@Sun.COM Cc: ssh-iteam@Sun.COM Message-id: <4703CCD3.1060102@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070731) Status: RO Content-Length: 66 This case was closed (again) in PSARC today. -- Darren J Moffat