Subject: Re: [PATCH] Follow RFC4253 section 11.4

Re: [PATCH] Follow RFC4253 section 11.4

From: Daniel Stenberg <>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 20:02:28 +0100 (CET)

On Fri, 2 Mar 2012, Steven Dake wrote:

> I made this change to stop getting the 82 packets which were causing the
> leaks.
> I am not in favor of asserting the lib when packet 3 is received. There are
> probably many conditions under which the error packet 3 could be received
> with different ssh daemons (I am using openssh for the server atm). I'd
> prefer it be rejected silently (or given back to the api caller) over an
> assertion.


I've not really caught up the backs and forths of this discussion. Is there an
outcome or patch suggested or where do we stand on the leak thing?

Received on 2012-03-05