SFTP support for subsecond times

[Daja / Dahya / Mark Dominik Bürkle]

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.]
.
la tero brulas!
#VerdajDezertoj
Saluton,
Daja / Dahya
unua NovaUNPrezident

Am 21. Mai 2023 21:45:07 MESZ schrieb Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour at gmail.com>:
>On 5/10/23 08:50, Lucas Holt wrote:
>> On 5/10/23 4:36 AM, Antonio Larrosa wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This is probably a long email, but please bear with me. I plan to
>>> submit a patch and would like to explain what I will do before doing
>>> it so I don't lose time if there's some flaw in my plan.
>>>
>>> I currently use sshfs to mount directories from some computers and a
>>> NAS into other computers. I recently noticed that when copying some
>>> files from one computer into one of these sshfs mounted directories
>>> (supposedly preserving times) the files are losing the subsecond part
>>> of mtime (and atime). So, for example, `stat foo` shows this locally:
>> 
>> My first thought after reading this is why aren't you using NFS?
>> 
>> I can't speak to what patches might get accepted, but it does seem like 
>> this is the wrong tool for the job.
>
>Not sure what Antonio’s reason is, but using NFS securely is much harder
>than SSH on all systems I know of, and impossible on OpenBSD without a VPN
>tunnel.
>-- 
>Sincerely,
>Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)