--On Wednesday, April 25, 2001 3:06 PM -0400 "David N. Blank-Edelman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Dykstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> What are the advantages of that over rsyncd.conf's "hosts allow" and
>> "hosts deny"?
>
> The main advantage would be the ability for sites that already use
> tcpwrappers to centralize their network authorization
> mechanism. Having this information spread out in lots of little
> separate files is harder to maintain than keeping it all under one
> framework in one set of configuration files.
>
> That being said, it is possible to hide rsync daemons behind
> tcpwrappers tcpd, it is just less efficient than having it be built in
> to the server itself (and you still have two sets of config files to
> contend with).
>
> Respectfully,
> David N. Blank-Edelman
I agree with this... In fact, it isn't even difficult to add tcpwrappers
support to rsync... What would it be? A few lines of code? I think the
most difficulty is adding support to the configuration process of the
applications that want to use it... but heck, you can rip that code out
of something else that does that too :-) In any the case, it is cleaner
to add support directly within the application, since it covers all the
bases (inetd vs standalone), runs more efficiently (less forking) and
adds another useful feature to your list (tcpwrappers support!) ;-)
Just another penny to add to the well...
Scott
--
+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
Scott W. Adkins http://www.cns.ohiou.edu/~sadkins/
UNIX Systems Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ 7626282 Work (740)593-9478 Fax (740)593-1944
+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
CNS, HDL Center, Suite 301, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701-2979
