On 09/08/2015 07:48 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 08/09/15 13:55, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> On 09/08/2015 12:09 PM, Richard Maw wrote:
>>> I understood that the common configuration for socket activated sshd was to
>>> have a sshd.service for if you want it to always be running, and a pair of
>>>
On 09/07/2015 11:28 AM, Richard Maw wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> How is this handled ? Should we put a big warning in sshd_config to hint
>> user to configure ListenAddress in sshd.socket in the case socket
>> activation is used ?
>
>> Or should sshd
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 10:05:05AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> On 09/07/2015 11:28 AM, Richard Maw wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> >> How is this handled ? Should we put a big warning in sshd_config to hint
> >> user to configure ListenAddress in
On 09/08/2015 12:09 PM, Richard Maw wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 10:05:05AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> On 09/07/2015 11:28 AM, Richard Maw wrote:
>>> On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
How is this handled ? Should we put a big warning in sshd_config to
On 08/09/15 13:55, Francis Moreau wrote:
> On 09/08/2015 12:09 PM, Richard Maw wrote:
>> I understood that the common configuration for socket activated sshd was to
>> have a sshd.service for if you want it to always be running, and a pair of
>> sshd@.service and sshd.socket.
>
> Ah no, with this
On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> How is this handled ? Should we put a big warning in sshd_config to hint
> user to configure ListenAddress in sshd.socket in the case socket
> activation is used ?
> Or should sshd simply ignore all listening addresses defined in
