RE: Line termination philosophy [Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-secsh-publickeyfile-08.txt]

["Glen Matthews" <Glen%montreal.hcl.com@localhost>]

Hi,


>Is anyone on this list (which seems to include most SSH implementors)
going >to
>have their SSH implementation inconvenienced by the current text?  That
is,
>does it affect any real SSH implementation?  If it directly affects
your >code,
>please let us know.

  I agree the debate is silly, but I certainly don't want to have to
support so-called flat files using the equivalent of lrecl and recfm (I
used to program on MVS a few, well, quite a few, years ago). I did this
once for an ftp implementation and would rather never do it again. To
convert data between systems is damn annoying, frankly - eg ASCII vs.
EBCDIC - and why we'd wish this upon ourselves is mystifying. I supposed
the point of standards was to make specs system independent. 

  As far as I am concerned, to support anything *other* than the current
draft recommendations of <CR> and <LF> combinations would seriously
inconvenience my implementation. And I frankly probably wouldn't bother
unless a customer specifically requested this. 

  Clearly, the ambiguity in the <CR> and <LF> characters is designed to
satisfy *nix and MS systems. I'd prefer just one, and don't care which.

Glen Matthews
Hummingbird