On Sun, 2023-07-16 at 17:26 +0200, Daja / Dahya / Mark Dominik Bürkle wrote: > using "synchronized" subsecond timestamps imho only makes sense with > synchronized time (ntp) through that ssh tunnel, too. > and with this assumption a "full VPN ssh usage" instead of "only > filesystem timestamps" [maybe trying with target systems without > subsecond timestamps?] seems impractical to me. or at least "... > [sry, didnt have internet to send, > incomplete but readable imho.] I don't want to put words in Antonio's mouth, but what he pointed out seems to me to be this: - sftp strips the low-order bits from timestamps. - This is arguably a bug. - It's fixable with a small patch. - The fix is both backwards-compatible and standards-compatible. - He'd be willing to implement it. I think his analysis is correct. The ensuing discussion about backups, file servers, tunnels etc. is hardly relevant. -- Hans Petter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
