[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited
From: |
Richard Levitte |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited |
Date: |
Thu, 06 Sep 2012 13:30:49 +0200 (CEST) |
In message <address@hidden> on Thu, 06 Sep 2012 04:56:45 -0400, Stephen Leake
<address@hidden> said:
stephen_leake> Richard Levitte <address@hidden> writes:
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> > In message <address@hidden> on Thu, 06
stephen_leake> > Sep 2012 05:56:12 +0200 (CEST), Richard Levitte
<address@hidden>
stephen_leake> > said:
stephen_leake> >
stephen_leake> > richard> I had a look in std_hooks.lua and noticed the ssh+ux:
schema, which
stephen_leake> > richard> basically does what I'm after...
stephen_leake> >
stephen_leake> > Speaking of this, I'm thinking about that scheme name, and it
comes
stephen_leake> > out as odd to me... there seems to be a concensus out there
that a
stephen_leake> > protocol transported through another protocol should be named
stephen_leake> > {protocol}+{transport}. ssh+ux: does the exact opposite, and
ux+ssh:
stephen_leake> > would be more appropriate. Furthermore, since that's
basically UNIX
stephen_leake> > domain sockets piped through SSH, and mtn supports local UNIX
domain
stephen_leake> > sockets through the scheme local: (because netxx does that,
that's
stephen_leake> > why), I'm pondering that the ssh+ux: scheme should really be
renamed
stephen_leake> > to local+ssh: (of course, we can keep ssh+ux: as an alias).
stephen_leake> >
stephen_leake> > Thoughts?
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> local+ssh sounds more like your second scheme
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> Attempting to generalize/abstract a naming convention:
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> ssh {host} socat - UNIX-CONNECT:{path}
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> I'm not clear what's a protocol and what's a transport here; it
seems to
stephen_leake> me the actual data exchange protocol is always mtn (that defines
how to
stephen_leake> exchange certs, keys, revisions, and possibly authentication),
and both
stephen_leake> ssh and unix domain sockets are transports.
You're right, it was poorly expressed. Say {transpport}+{tunnel}
then. My inspiration is really git+ssh:, and I believe I've seen
similar constructs elsewhere, but memory fails me for the moment.
And you're absolutely right, we're not entirely consistent either (but
neither is anyone else)... "ssh:" should really be "mtn+ssh:" if we
were to be entirely consistent, for example.
stephen_leake> > Either way, I realised that the possible uris aren't fully
documented
stephen_leake> > in the manual, so I'm doing so now.
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> That's good.
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> > And I think it would be good to have a consensus on local+ssh:
vs
stephen_leake> > ux+ssh: vs ssh+ux: before the added documentation gets
published.
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> Now is the time to rename it, if we are going to. But so far, I
don't
stephen_leake> see a clear naming convention.
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake>
stephen_leake> This discussion suggests a way to make file: work on Windows
native; use
stephen_leake> TCP sockets to connect between the client and server instances
of mtn.
Not sure that's a good idea from a security point of view.
Cheers,
Richard
--
Richard Levitte address@hidden
http://richard.levitte.org/
"Life is a tremendous celebration - and I'm invited!"
-- from a friend's blog, translated from Swedish
- [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Richard Levitte, 2012/09/05
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Stephen Leake, 2012/09/05
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Richard Levitte, 2012/09/05
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Richard Levitte, 2012/09/06
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Stephen Leake, 2012/09/06
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited,
Richard Levitte <=
- Re: [Monotone-devel] file: on windows via tcp sockets, Stephen Leake, 2012/09/06
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Stephen Leake, 2012/09/06
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Richard Levitte, 2012/09/06
- Re: [Monotone-devel] netsync over ssh revisited, Stephen Leake, 2012/09/07