Re: secsh-sftp-scp-uri draft

[Jon Bright <jon%siliconcircus.com@localhost>]

Joel N. Weber II wrote:

> > 1.  Default port issue
> >
> > Status:  Proposed change- "If the port is not included, the default port 
> > (22) is assumed."
>
>
> I'd prefer to see something along the lines of ``If the port is not
> included, the default port that is used when the user does not specify
> a port is assumed.''  In particular, I would like the text to have the
> property that if the ssh protocol were changed to support SRV in the
> future, that ssh URLs would automagically start using SRV records when
> the port is not specified, without needing to update the URL spec.

Perhaps "If the port is not included, the port should be as specified in 
[SSH-TRANS] (section 3.1)"?


--
Jon Bright
Silicon Circus Ltd.
http://www.siliconcircus.com