ssh -f and pid

[Ming]

Just to be clear, even with Van Huesden's patch to ssh, it would not be
"plug and play."  At least ssh could meet the dominant paradigm of tracking
pid half-way through the pid file.  Half-way, part-way, is a lot better than
the socket no-way.

On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Ming <minger at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Ming wrote:
>>
>> > > It isn't necessary. You can tear down ssh connections from the control
>> > > socket and learn the PID of a running SSH, see the commands listed
>> > > under -O in ssh(1).
>> > >
>> > A individual can do an number of things with a understanding of and
>> beyond
>> > the man page, but how do you get ssh to play nicely in a ecosystem of
>> > monitoring software?
>>
>> It isn't above and beyond the manpage, checking the state of a running
>> connection is a clearly documented feature.
>>
>> > Say the os has bunch of ssh processes active.  How the monitoring
>> software
>> > in a standard way which ones it created -- and thus track -- and which
>> ones
>> > it hasn't?
>>
>> It can request separate control sockets if it likes.
>>
>> > ControlPath has to be specified for -O and command line query required?
>>  How
>> > is ssh suppose to plug and play with monitoring software?
>>
>> I think the monitoring software needs to support ssh and not the other
>> way around. There are lots of ways one might monitor ssh, and I don't
>> think
>> we could even be "plug and play" with all of them.
>>
>> -d
>>
>
> The monitoring software just needs to know the pid of the command executed.
>  That's all it needs to be plug and play.  And they only kill the process by
> pid.    Looking at all the times (via Google) you have offered the same ssh
> -O solution across the web to people have asked for a pid the years, it
> seems that it is *your* stance not to be "plug and play."
>
> The few monitoring packages I experimented all expect a pid from the
> daemon.
>
> Luckily, I could find one package, autossh, that specifically -- and only
> -- monitors ssh.  Now, I have to run two packages, one to monitor ssh
> specifically and one for all my other daemons and scripts.
>
> At least it works.  Would the security of openssh be so compromised by
> spitting out its pid?
>
> -M
>
>
>
>
>
>
>