From owner-cvs-all  Fri Sep 28  9: 7: 0 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9CA3837B40E; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 09:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131])
	by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA01472;
	Fri, 28 Sep 2001 10:06:52 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com)
Received: (from nate@localhost)
	by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA25473;
	Fri, 28 Sep 2001 10:06:52 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from nate)
From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15284.40987.681415.432076@nomad.yogotech.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 10:06:51 -0600
To: Gregory Neil Shapiro <gshapiro@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams), cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/crypto/openssh atomicio.h auth-chall.c auth2-chall.c canohost.h clientloop.h groupaccess.c groupaccess.h kexdh.c kexgex.c log.h mac.c mac.h misc.c misc.h pathnames.h
In-Reply-To: <15284.40817.364418.89517@horsey.gshapiro.net>
References: <200109280133.f8S1Xr363615@freefall.freebsd.org>
	<20010928015644.N84277-100000@achilles.silby.com>
	<20010928013527.A8101@xor.obsecurity.org>
	<15284.36137.254842.551909@nomad.yogotech.com>
	<15284.40817.364418.89517@horsey.gshapiro.net>
X-Mailer: VM 6.95 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid
Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams)
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <cvs-all.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20cvs-all>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20cvs-all>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> nate> So, in other words, there is really no point in having both protocols
> nate> listed in the same line, since only one protocol is ever attempted.
> 
> nate> A better description of the protocol line woudl be:
> 
> nate> "Protocol 1"
> nate> *OR*
> nate> "Protocol 2"
> 
> nate> Since in fact, it doesn't try the first protocol, and if it fails, then
> nate> try the second protocol.  It always sticks with the primary protocol.
> 
> No, it does make sense to have both. 

Not in the client ocnfiguration, which I thought was being discussed.
Or am I confused?

In any case, the client configuration line only appears to allow ONE
protocol exchange to be supported, and the protocol it chooses is the
first one listed.  It never 'falls back' and tries the other protocol if
the first one fails.


Nate

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message