I think, rsh is quite obsolete

[Andrew Haley]

Adam Tkac writes:
 > Tomas Mraz pí¡e v St 08. 11. 2006 v 12:07 +0100:
 > > 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
 > > 
 > 
 > You're truly right. This idea about high-performance systems doesn't
 > strike me. I'm going to look forward to this idea when upstream of
 > OpenSSH accepts HPN patch (or other improvement for this problem).

The acid test is this, run over a fast network:

 $ tar cf - foo | rsh bar tar xfBp -

This should hit the bandwidth of the connection.

Andrew.