Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Sunday 08 August 2004 01:29, Alexis Agahi wrote: > >> IMO you should split telnet/ssh facility from console shell. >> One should be able to run the shell from command line (without having >> remote connection). > > sorry, I gently disagree...
As long as it is gently ;) > Having a network socket is so much more > natural, then trying to 'redirect Merlin output' elsewhere, get hold of > System.in and be limited to a single user. Also doesn't help me much in > background ops. I was just trying to suggest an unix architure (inetd, telnetd, shell, tty, syslog). > telnet localhost <port> is IMO, the most natural way to deal with this; > > * SSH tunnelling is possible, to secure the connection. > * Can combine that with a "allow"/"deny" feature for incoming > connections, > to 'force' secure transport. > > As for HTTP access, I am sorry to say that people are 'nuts' in respect to > http. > IP = stateless > TCP = stateful > HTTP = stateless > MyStuff = stateful > so why on earth go through this state-emulation once more? > If the port80 is the issue, then do a SSH tunnel over port80... voila! sometime tunnelling over 80 is not possible (especially with transparent proxy breaking the stream) > Don't expect me to add anything in this area, as I find it a stupid way to > do things. np > It is somewhat related, since I can imagine that a Merlin instance is used > by a bunch of developers, each only authorized to some containers, and > perhaps only to certain operations. So yes, it is related... But instead > of digging into this at the moment, I decided to get something running > quickly, as I have an immediate need. np -- Al --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
