In my location the equivalent to 'dark fiber' over copper is
referred to as 'dry copper', and to order it you usually have
to claim to be installing an alarm system.
The phrase 'dry copper' seemed weird to me when I first
heard it, since I could not imagine wanting 'wet copper'.
On Sun, 16 Jun
Jeff Bonner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
3) Any reason you *wouldn't* want to use compression in SSH?
Yes, where your bandwidth is cheaper/faster than your CPU. For example on a
100Mb/s or faster LAN it is rarely useful to compress.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
/OFFTOPIC
Wet copper usually meant that there was a DC loading on the circuit
90volt if I remember correctly
The idea was that if there was a marginal connection somwhere in the wiring
this loading would cause a spark thereby welding the join back up
I've been told that most circuits today are
This one time, Loic Le Loarer wrote:
Le Monday 10 June 2002 ? 10:23:23 -0700, Anne Carasik a ?crit:
Check the man page for what ciphers SSH2 accepts. I usually leave it on
Blowfish because it's secure and it's the fastest cipher. AES sucks
because it's dog slow, and it doesn't buy you that
On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 11:33:34PM +0200, Robert van der Meulen wrote:
Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Right; when you bought it, it was dark. Once you put light into it,
it's no longer dark. If someone thinks dark denotes who owns the
tranceivers, well, they're deluded :)
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun,
Jun 16, 2002 at 11:33:34PM +0200, Robert van
der Meulen wrote:
Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Right; when you bought it, it was dark. Once
you put light into it,
it's no longer dark. If someone thinks dark
denotes
--- Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun,
Jun 16, 2002 at 11:33:34PM +0200, Robert van
der Meulen wrote:
Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Right; when you bought it, it was dark. Once
you put light into it,
it's no longer dark. If someone thinks dark
denotes
Quoting Matt Zimmerman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 08:29:15PM +0200, Robert van der Meulen wrote:
My data isn't worth one bit less because it's travelling over dark fiber
:)
Eh? If your data is travelling over it, then it isn't dark.
Le Monday 10 June 2002 à 10:23:23 -0700, Anne Carasik a écrit:
Check the man page for what ciphers SSH2 accepts. I usually leave it on
Blowfish because it's secure and it's the fastest cipher. AES sucks
because it's dog slow, and it doesn't buy you that much more security
than Blowfish.
Hi
Quoting Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Right; when you bought it, it was dark. Once you put light into it,
it's no longer dark. If someone thinks dark denotes who owns the
tranceivers, well, they're deluded :)
Both meanings are 100% correct, and 100% acceptable terms. Maybe if you
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 12:38:15PM +0200, Sergio Rodr?guez de Guzm?n Mart?nez
wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-06-13 at 0330.28 -0300):
Yes. MD5 has had some very minor breaks. It is easier to find
hash collisions than it should be. This means that it is possible to find
two messages
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 01:13:06PM -0400, Jeff Bonner wrote:
2) The SHA1-96 hash should be better than MD5-96, correct?
Yes. MD5 has had some very minor breaks. It is easier to find
hash collisions than it should be. This means that it is possible to find
two messages that hash to the same
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-06-13 at 0330.28 -0300):
Yes. MD5 has had some very minor breaks. It is easier to find
hash collisions than it should be. This means that it is possible to find
two messages that hash to the same value. You need to choose _both_
messages, so this doesn't help
Hi Jeff,
This one time, Jeff Bonner wrote:
I've been playing around with a Woody installation, connecting to it via
SSH2, with SecureCRT 3.4 for Win32. I think I've finally figured out what
encryption types this Debian package (ssh 3.0.2p1-9) supports, but please
correct me if I'm wrong --
Quoting Anne Carasik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
This one time, Jeff Bonner wrote:
3) Any reason you *wouldn't* want to use compression in SSH?
Yes, if you're going over a high speed line, no reason to use
compression. If you're connecting through a slow line (like a
modem), use compression.
I'm
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Robert van der Meulen wrote:
Quoting Anne Carasik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
This one time, Jeff Bonner wrote:
3) Any reason you *wouldn't* want to use compression in SSH?
Yes, if you're going over a high speed line, no reason to use
compression. If you're connecting
Quoting Thomas Thurman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I can see how [speed of line] and [whether to use compression] are
related, and how [trustedness of line] and [whether to use encryption] are
related. But I don't see how anyone could say that If your data's going
over a high-speed line, there's no
Should have absolutely no problems connecting to sshd on Woody
or Sid from Windows using SecureCRT 3.4 or SecureFX 1.9 as I run 3.4.1
and 1.9.6 respectively from Windows 2000 with no problem on multiple
machines... I set the SSH Server to Auto Detect and left all Ciphers
and MAC options
On Mon 10 Jun 2002 13:23, Anne Carasik wrote:
This one time, Jeff Bonner wrote:
As in, This one time, at band camp...? ;) Also, sorry about
the wretched linebreaks, folks. Good ol Outlook.
Check the man page for what ciphers SSH2 accepts. I usually
leave it on Blowfish because it's
On Mon 10 Jun 2002 13:24, Mark Janssen wrote:
Run the ssh daemon with debugging on (2 levels or more) and check the
output:
sshd -d -d -d -p someport
ssh -v -p someport 127.0.0.1
Look at all the pretty output...
snipped
Yeah, after I wrote that message, I tried to connect with a
On Mon 10 Jun 2002 15:30, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
Should have absolutely no problems connecting to sshd on Woody
or Sid from Windows using SecureCRT 3.4 or SecureFX 1.9 as I run 3.4.1
and 1.9.6 respectively from Windows 2000 with no problem on multiple
machines... I set the SSH Server to
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 01:13:06PM -0400, Jeff Bonner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote...
3) Any reason you *wouldn't* want to use compression in SSH?
Besides the potential save on bandwidth, it depends on what you
transfer over the wire. If you are lucky, the space saving is so big
that you save more
This one time, Jeff Bonner wrote:
On Mon 10 Jun 2002 13:23, Anne Carasik wrote:
This one time, Jeff Bonner wrote:
As in, This one time, at band camp...? ;) Also, sorry about
the wretched linebreaks, folks. Good ol Outlook.
Yes, exactly. :) I got tired of the typical attribution line.
23 matches
Mail list logo
