Since Fedora is not aimed at enterpise/business ..

[Derek P. Moore]

> Those are apps that have been compiled/built to
> support Kerberos, they are not the same thing.
>
> No, only if you are in a kerberized environment that
> uses those kerberized apps. AS I have said, and the
> two of you apparently refuse to realize, is that SSH
> can utilize kerberos as well. You are implicitly
> saying that rcp/rsh/telnet for example are a
> mandatory part of kerberos utilizing networks. That
> is factually and materially incorrect.

Actually...  telnet, rlogin, rsh, rcp, ftp, and their
respective daemons are a part of pretty much every
Kerberos distribution (MIT & Heimdal).

> Note, those are *apps* not kerberos supplying those.
> Use a kerberized ssh and you have no need for
telnet,
> ssh, ftp, rlogin. rcp, et al..

Sorta true, but not really.  Actually, Kerberos (or,
rather, the Kerberos libraries that the Kerberized
apps are linked against), not the apps themselves,
provides those apps with session ecryption.  So, it's
not untrue to say that Kerberos provides the session
encryption functionality.

> And on top of it you get all the other nice things
> that SSH does. Mayeb it's me but I don't consider
> being able to log into a remote machine, launch a
> graphical app and have it display on my screen
weird.
> Even if that machine is through several other "hops"
> of machines.

To pick a nit:  Can't you do this same thing with
telnet?  At least as long as you set the DISPLAY
environment variable correctly (or use --display [or
-display]).

> Kerberos and SSh are not the same,

True.  Just as Linux and FreeBSD are not the same.  Or
just as MIT Kerberos and Heimdal Kerberos are not the
same.  Or just as GNU 'ls' and BSD 'ls' are not the
same.

> and do not provide the same things,

Mostly, they do provide the same things.

Derek