Re: query about draft-ietf-secsh-connect-19.txt

[nisse%lysator.liu.se@localhost (Niels Möller)]

Anil Madhavapeddy <anil%recoil.org@localhost> writes:

> In draft-ietf-secsh-connect-19.txt, Section 7.1, there is a reference
> to:
> 
> byte     SSH_MSG_GLOBAL_REQUEST_SUCCESS
> uint32   port that was bound on the server
> 
> which should probably be "SSH_MSG_REQUEST_SUCCESS"

I think you're right.

> The other odd thing about this packet is that it's the only one which 
> doesn't encode the request type in which it's in response to.

The *reply* messages in general includes *no* request type identifier:

     byte      SSH_MSG_REQUEST_SUCCESS
     .....     response specific data
--
     byte      SSH_MSG_REQUEST_FAILURE
--
     byte      SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_SUCCESS
     uint32    recipient_channel
--
     byte      SSH_MSG_CHANNEL_FAILURE
     uint32    recipient_channel

To make it possible for the originator of a request to identify to
which request each reply refers to, it is required that replies to
SSH_MSG_GLOBAL_REQUESTS must be sent in the same order as the
corresponding request messages.

And for channel requests, replies that relate to the same channel must
also be replied to in the right order (channel requests for *distinct*
channels can be replied to out-of-order, at least that's my
understanding of things).

Regards,
/Niels