On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:55 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: > Adam Tkac writes: > > I think, It's no argument to include rsh in next versions of fc/rhel. > > OpenSSH could successfully substitute this component. SSH is more secure > > than rsh and has all features of rsh. Do you think anything else?? > > High performance environments are one obvious example. I've used rsh > for high-load testing of systems, where you don't want encryption > overhead to get in the way. Yes, definitely. There are also other problems with scp/sftp protocols which lower their performance on fast networks. These are being remedied with the HPN patch (http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/) but upstream still refuses to accept the patch and we don't want to diverge from it so much. There is also a question if this patch couldn't cause incompatibility with unpatched OpenSSH clients/servers in some circumstances. So I'd say, keep the rsh for now. Or even better possibility would be to move it to Extras as Extras are NOT a second class citizen and RHEL can still include it. -- Tomas Mraz No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. Turkish proverb -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
