Lars Appel wrote:

> Is this need for those very daemons or just for the functionality
> that they provide? In this case, being able to launch a program on
> the 3000 from a Unix machine (or another platform)?

i guess i don't quite understand your question....  my guess is the
two big candidates are rexec-d and remsh-d.  yes, the port would be to
gain the functionality.  it would be a great benefit to have an
'industry standard' method of reaching over to a mpe system to find
'something' out -- and have the stdout still be on originating box.

> Considering that there are so many different implementations for
> similar functionality, I sometimes wonder why people feel a strong
> need for a very specific implementation.

because the unix-heads don't know anyother way (frequently) (not
meaning to slam our friends but...)

> > (...) but these daemons need to come from hp.
>
> Not sure if I would agree here (probably due to not knowing all
> the underlying facts). Considering the various pieces of client-
> server code that has been ported to MPE/iX in the past, it might
> also be possible that someone outside HP would be able to do it.

having started down the 'i'll port it myself path', i'd say -- yes, it
could be done by 'someone outside of hp'.  i'd still rather see it
come from hp so it would be a part of the os -- just like java and
apache and....  i also think hp's the best candidate due to the
security implications surrounding the 'r' daemons.

> On the other hand, looking at potential alternate solutions (eg
> ftp SITE STREAM or Java Telnet), I wonder if it would be worth
> the porting effort. I, for example, would probably be too lazy
> (or too low on spare time) to port yet-another-daemon that only
> gives me similar functionality that I can already have by using
> one of the existing solutions.

to me -- the advantage of having something like remsh-d ported is that
you're making an implicit connection to the 3000 rather than excplicit
(like ftp or telnet).  given the potential i see, telnet and ftp look
old-fashioned (imo).

> Maybe I'm missing important points. Waiting for enlightenment...

i doubt i was very enlightening but i gave it a try....
:-)               - d

--
Donna Garverick     Sr. System Programmer
925-210-6631        [log in to unmask]

>>>MY opinions, not Longs Drug Stores'<<<