sshd. "UseDNS no" ignored?

[Dmitry Pryanishnikov]

Hello!

On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Nov 29, did you not say:
>
> "I'm still wondering why OpenSSH is _so_ inferior to SSH.COM's ssh2 (which is 
> also open-source)?"...?

  Yes, I did. And no, I didn't say anything about either licensing or 
OSI Open Source.

> David Adam then asked "Is it really open-source?"; while you responded to 
> this question, your answer was misleading.  The commercial version of SSH 
> publishes their source code, but that source code is not usable by many 
> people because of the restriction against commercial use.  Specifically, the 
> answer to the question David asked is "no": the F-Secure/SSH Communications 
> version of SSH is not "OSI Open Source", per OSD #6.

   David didn't mention OSI at all, you do.

>> 2) We _aren't_ in @opensource.org mailing list hierarchy - it's FreeBSD
>>    maillist, and I hope I'm free to _not_ submit anything to 
>> opensource.org's
>>    consideration, and just to express my opinion instead.
>
> While you are free to have an opinion about factual issues [1], if you insist 
> upon expressing an opinion which contradicts the facts (ie, such as claiming 
> that the SSH.COM license is "open-source"), you can expect people to disagree 
> with you by pointing out the relevant facts.

   I do insist on using the English word 'open' in it's vocabulary meaning
(open == NOT closed; you _can_ see the sources for free), and yes, it's
perfectly normal when people disagree with me ;)

> As for submitting anything to the OSI mailing list: if you refrain from 
> claiming that a proprietary license is "open source", then have no concern.
>
> On the other hand, the OSI board does contact sites which misuse the OSI Open 
> Source trademark to claim their proprietary software complies with the Open

   I don't use, abuse or misuse "the OSI Open Source trademark". You just can't
restrict the use of the English word "open", "open-source" etc, can you?!

> -Chuck
>
> [1]: Oddly enough, many people think so highly of their own opinions that 
> they choose to ignore facts which contradict their opinions.

   I think my opinion deserves expressing here, and you have no facts that
make me think otherwise. I think restricting the use of the phrase
'open-source' just to the OSI-blessed meaning looks the same as
patenting mouse doubleclick by Microsoft ;)

Sincerely, Dmitry
-- 
Atlantis ISP, System Administrator
e-mail:  dmitry at atlantis.dp.ua
nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE