niclas.zeising at gmail.com
Sun Nov 12 21:13:07 UTC 2006
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2006-11-13 05:27, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy at 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
>> 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
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
More information about the cvs-all