Bug 695781

Summary: [RFE] Clarify IPv6 usage in ssh, scp, sftp man pages
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) <rdassen>
Component: opensshAssignee: Jan F. Chadima <jchadima>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 6.1CC: jkodak, mvadkert, pvrabec, rbinkhor
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: Documentation, FutureFeature, Triaged
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: openssh-5.3p1-60.el6 Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 695783 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-12-06 09:56:01 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 607248, 695783, 703208    

Description J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) 2011-04-12 16:55:05 UTC 
> What is the nature and description of the request?
Man page clarification. In the ssh utilities, IPv6 addresses need to be
enclosed in square brackets "[]". The man page specifies this in descriptions
of port forwarding options, but there is no other indication of this
requirement.

> Why does the customer need this? (List the business requirements here)
Clarification of this requirement in the man pages makes usage either.
Initially the customer thought IPv6 was not working at all since this detail
was not specified.

> How would the customer like to achieve this? (List the functional
> requirements here)
A simple "IPv6 note" in all the ssh man pages. A note could also be added for
the "-6" switch description, however that option is only to force IPv6, so the
square bracket necessity can apply to other cases as well.

> For each functional requirement listed in question 4, specify how Red Hat and
> the customer can test to confirm the requirement is successfully implemented.
N/A

> Is there already an existing RFE upstream or in Red Hat bugzilla?
Not that I can find.

> How quickly does this need resolved? (desired target release)
No hard deadline but this is very minor documentation.

> List the affected packages
openssh
Comment 6 errata-xmlrpc 2011-12-06 09:56:01 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1551.html