Re: Feedback from uri list

[Terra Frost <terrafrost%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Jacob Nevins
<jacobn+secsh%chiark.greenend.org.uk@localhost> wrote:
> Steve Suehring writes:
>> The reviewer suggested using this format for the fingerprint:
>>
>>        ssh://user%host.example.com@localhost?fingerprint=ssh-dss-c1-b1-30-29-d7-
>>            b8-de-6c-97-77-10-d7-46-41-63-87
>>
>> Whereas the previous drafts had used this format:
>>
>>         ssh://user;fingerprint=ssh-dss-c1-b1-30-29-d7-b8-de-6c-97-
>>              77-10-d7-46-41-63-87%host.example.com@localhost
>>
>> The suggestion seems to make sense to me
>
> Me too. I don't know the rationale from the URI people, but the host key
> fingerprint isn't a property of the user, so doesn't really belong in
> userinfo.

The username, however, is a property of the user and it's not in userinfo.

What about something like this?:

ssh://ssh-dss-c1-b1-30-29-d7-b8-de-6c-97-77-10-d7-46-41-63-87%host.example.com@localhost?user=user

It's not without precedent, either.  When you log into a website, you
generally do so via an HTML form that submits stuff via POST.  The
above is in a format more analogous to GET, but still...  GET and POST
are pretty similar, as is, anyway.