https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1837
Nadav Har'El <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #1 from Nadav Har'El <[email protected]> 2010-11-22 20:20:59 EST --- I agree that the current behavior when two remote hosts are specified is unexpected, illogical, and should be considered a bug. The "scp" manual page says that "Copies between two remote hosts are also permitted.". This is not quite the case - and if the current behavior remains (and I think it shouldn't...), it should at least be explained. The reason I think the current behavior is NOT useful, is that on today's internet, security is rarely symmetrical: The fact that host A can ssh to host B and to host C, doesn't mean that B and C can ssh back to A, or ssh between themselves. So when I do on host A 'scp B:... C:...', I certainly don't expect B and C to communicate directly - if I wanted to do that I would have written "ssh B -c scp ... C:". When I go and run 'scp B:... C:...' on A, I fully expect all the data to pass through A. scp B:... C:... could have been very useful when I want to transfer a large remote file between B and C, without keeping a copy on A and when B and C cannot communicate directly (because of routing or authentication issues). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching the assignee of the bug. _______________________________________________ openssh-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-bugs
