Re: using auth-source for authentication

[Michael Albinus]

Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> writes:

> MA> For ports, Tramps uses numbers only. Do you support it as well?
>
> It's OK to use numbers, but it's much better to use port names.

In general, Tramp does not need a port. Almost ever, ports are not
given by the user, and Tramp uses (implicitely) the default port of
the given method. So it would be OK for Tramp, if the port in your
authinfo is optional.

And when a user specifies a port, it is very likely that the specified
port is NOT the default port. An entry in authinfo, containing "port
scp", is mostly not needed. Instead of, an entry "port 2222" is more
likely (given that the user wants to access port 2222, instead of the
default port 22).

> - call the protocol "tramp" and have it match any Tramp protocol (this
>   makes sense, since it's extremely rare to have multiple passwords per
>   account on a machine, and auth-source is all about simplicity)

That is a good way.

> - pass a protocol name based on the port or inferred from the file
>   handler (probably hardest to implement, but also would allow for the
>   rare case of multiple passwords I mentioned above)

Makes sense when there are different passwords for different
methods. However, your "port scp" entry means Tramp _method_ "scp", and
not Tramp _port_ "scp", mapped to "22". For clarity, the keyword shall
reflect this.

> - keep using numbers, my least favorite solution as I explained

Would be clean in case of different passwords for different methods, on
different ports.

> What's your preference?

I would say, the first option (ignoring any "port" in your authinfo,
which might be useful for other applications) is sufficient for
now. If there are other requests, let's handle them when they arrive.

> Ted

Best regards, Michael.