--Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 02:48:14PM +0000, Gavan Fantom wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Sean Davis wrote:
>=20
> > If the network is safe enough for rsh, it's probably safe enough to jus=
t run
> > X over tcp without forwarding it through anything.
>=20
> This is a pain when you have to start messing with xhost and setting
> DISPLAY correctly, especially if you're not on :0.0.

Agreed, but tunneling X when you already trust your network, even if it is
more convienent, does nothing but add more overhead to the X connections.

My point was that there really isn't much use for X-over-ssh on a
trusted(-enough) network. The advantage you point out is about the only one
I can think of, and I don't think it outweighs the protocol overhead of
running X through ssh.

-Sean

--
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign                   Sean Davis
 X  Against HTML                       aka dive
/ \ Email!

--Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQE/+DYucMEZWGhfx9kRAiqQAJ94UM4VdQG4GcfYq93TlbCiTMXZkACgjxLF
BA8/ajNzYTKsmKi4o2fTgyo=
=reNW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Qxx1br4bt0+wmkIi--