Re: availability of specifications

[Markus Friedl <markus%openbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 05:19:22PM +0200, denis bider wrote:
> > > Why has the whitespace formatting of the various drafts
> > > changed between versions, making diff tools useless?
> >
> > wdiff works fine.
> 
> Thanks, actually I noticed that in the archives, but I thought it was a
> reasonable argument nevertheless.

editors changed, so formatting changed. i don't buy this point.

sftp is gone because there is no editor.

> Now that I'm speaking, I think there's one other major problem with SSH2.
> With so many implementations out there, the specification should now be
> done. Over. Completed.

yes, but this is what the group is be talking about (if there would
be any traffic on the list).

> Right now, we should be working on SSH 2.1, not SSH
> 2.0. That would be the right approach, and it would solve many problems that
> we are now encountering. The way it is right now, we have a deployed
> standard and yet we're trying to hack it with improvements and new request
> types.  We're trying to have it both ways.

i don't think anyone want's to _change_ the current specification.
all we try to do is find ambiguities and fix them.

> Such behavior seems irresponsible to me.
> 
> I don't know about you, but if it were up to me, I would be pushing to make
> SSH2 official as it stands in current implementations, ASAP. The very fact
> that widely deployed implementations already exist is a violation of the
> standardization process. I think we need to fix that situation, not make it
> worse by continuing to tinker with the 2.0 version of the protocol.
> 
> I think we need to seal version 2.0 as it is and then proceed with 2.1.

but this is what the current work is about.
i don't understand your point. or do you suggest to say:
this is 2.0, in 2.1 we will remove all ambiguities?

-m