On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 02:54:26PM +1100, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 28 Oct 2000, Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My guess is that if the SSHv2 spec issues are cleared up then SSHv2 is
> > the best possibility for rsync. I don't mean using SSH with rsync as is
> > done now, but rather to use SSH as a library within rsync instead of as
> > an external program.
>
> Embedding ssh as a library might work around many of the TCP stack
> bugs, but like SSL I doubt the ssh library could cope with sharing a
> single socket between two processes.
This is probably quite the case. If rsync works as two processes both of
which write to the other side in an un-coordinated fashion then rsync
will have to be modified. Either one process I/O will have to be
subordinated to the others's, or I/O will have to be synchronized
between the two processes, or each process shoul have its own logical
I/O channel to the other side (i.e., different data streams encrypted
with different session keys framed and transmitted in such a way that
the other rsync can distinguish between the two channels and operate
accordingdly -- this requires atomic writes or synchronization). Or
maybe something else.
> --
> Martin Pool, Linuxcare, Inc.
> +61 2 6262 8990
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.linuxcare.com/
> Linuxcare. Support for the revolution.
Nico
--
