I think, rsh is quite obsolete

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Dave Jones <davej at redhat.com> said:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:50:51AM +0100, Adam Tkac wrote:
>  > 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??
> 
> The rsh _client_ has its uses in legacy environments.
> The daemon, questionable.
> Likewise, why we still ship telnet-server in core is beyond me.

I have needed telnet-server a few times when trying to debug when
connecting from network gear (no ssh in most).  Also, where we allow
shell access to web hosting customers, we still allow telnet (most of
them are on Windows and it only includes a telnet client).

Both telnet and rsh (client and server) are stable packages with few
security issues historically.  They are old protocols, but they do still
have their uses.
-- 
Chris Adams <cmadams at hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.