Other than semantics, how exactly does your description differ from mine?
Did the phrase "reverses ... sense" confuse you? It was meant to imply a
reversal of the typical client/server relationship.
This is a discussion list for firewalls; how does your explanation make it
more clear that X/Windows presents a problem for firewalled systems?
I've managed to supply a solution to the original poster's problem; have you
SOLUTIONS to contribute?
----- Original Message -----
From: Lack Mr G M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 12:03 PM
> The problem is that X/windows reverses the client/server sense; your
local
> system "serves" your display, keyboard and mouse to the remote "client".
No it doesn't! It is just that some people equate "server" with "the
big thing somewhere else" and "client" with "the little thing on my
desk". This is not what the words mean. It is some people who are
confused; not X.
The "client" is the thing that asks for services. This is the
application (note that it is *not* a system). This may be running on a
remote system, and that remote system may be a "server", but the
application on it is an X client.
The "server" is the thing which provides the services. This is the
X-server, which usually runs on the little thing on your desk.
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
