> freeware products like MindTerm may not support 2.x. Also, if SSH had > | remained free, then an X product like XVision would probably eventually > | support SSH authentication. Right now we have nasty workarounds like X > | forwarding thru F-Secure for NT. > > Well, the protocol is completely open, and better. I'd think the existing > free ssh clients other than F-Secure's one will catch up. > -- I don't think so. The author of one of the best, TTSSH, has already said he considers the effort too great to support 2.xx The liscensing for 2.0 clearly needs to change if it is to be supported in the long term by the "open" community [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Long term viability of SSH, will there be a free SSH ... Charles Leeds
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there be a ... Keresztfalvi Gabor
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there be a ... John A. Martin
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there be a ... Cameron Simpson
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there b... Michael
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will the... Greg A. Woods
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will the... Robert O'Callahan
- No Subject Ali Gunduz
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there be a ... steven . mcelwee
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there b... Sami Lehtinen
- Re: Long term viability of SSH, will there be a ... Stefan Jon Silverman
