Re: OpenSSH annoyance
From: General Schvantzkoph (schvantzkoph_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/04/04
- Next message: Mark Ferguson: "Re: A Word of Explanation For Newcomers"
- Previous message: Firewoman: "Re: A Word of Explanation For Newcomers"
- In reply to: Lawrence DčOliveiro: "Re: OpenSSH annoyance"
- Next in thread: Robert Heller: "Re: OpenSSH annoyance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 08:36:12 -0400
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 18:39:14 +1300, Lawrence DčOliveiro wrote:
> In article <pan.2004.10.04.01.02.02.390820@yahoo.com>,
> General Schvantzkoph <schvantzkoph@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I suppose the right thing to do would be to but
>>the same public/private key pair on all of the machines.
>
> I thought about this, but it seems wrong somehow. There's probably some
> situation where giving two machines the same SSH host key turns out to
> be a bad idea. :)
>
>>You would get
>>this for free if you used a network mounted home directory (I don't, I
>>like having different home directories on each machine).
>
> The two machines in question are separate, and I don't like the idea of
> tying them together in this way with an NFS mount.
Every corporate network that I've ever seen uses NFS mounts for home
directories so having a common ~/.ssh directory must work. On my own
network, which has 6 Linux machines, I use local mounts for the home
directories. I use local mounts for two reasons, 1) the performance is
much better, 2) jobs don't interfere with each other. I use CVS to manage
all of my files so I can keep things in sync pretty easily without having
a shared home directory.
- Next message: Mark Ferguson: "Re: A Word of Explanation For Newcomers"
- Previous message: Firewoman: "Re: A Word of Explanation For Newcomers"
- In reply to: Lawrence DčOliveiro: "Re: OpenSSH annoyance"
- Next in thread: Robert Heller: "Re: OpenSSH annoyance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|