On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 12:11:54AM +0100, Niels Mvller wrote:
> But perhaps it is better to run them on separate ports, so that sshd1
> doesn't lose if lshd crashes for some reason. I don't quite like the
> fallback trick, and sshd1 might take a non-negligible time to start,
> as the first thing it does is to generate a reasonably large temporary
> RSA key.
Ick. Given the choice (and I might not be... <grin>) I'd prefer that
ssh1 sit on the main port. That's the expected behaviour for people
getting to subversions right now for CVS.
> Hmm. Speaking of RSA... perhaps OpenSSH is totally off-limits for
> patent reasons? The RSA patent doesn't expire until September 20
> (IIRC). LSH and SSH2 doesn't have this problem, as they use DH and DSA
> instead.
I don't know what encryption stuff OpenSSH uses. I know it's supposed to
support more than one, but I've never really cared what they were. That
could be very sad - I beleive most of the cvs-write accesses are done
through OpenSSH now.
--
There is no sin except stupidity.
- Oscar Wilde
