[Beowulf] passwordless "rsh" login

[John Bushnell]

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Robert G. Brown wrote:

> On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Trent Piepho wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > Things bad about ssh:
> > > 
> > >  i) relatively slow
> > >  j) cannot select "no encryption" as option even on secure networks
> > >  k) evil tty disconnect "feature" that requires ~. escapes (nested yet)
> > > to leave a job backgrounded from an ssh session.
> > 
> > What is so annoying about these things is that they didn't used to be
> > problems with ssh.  They were "features" added intentionally.  I cannot
> > stand the "we know what's best for you" attitude.
> 
> Amen.  I totally, overwhelmingly agree with you.  Given that j is the
> cause of i, having a no encryption feature would leave you with
> relatively cheap host authentication (a good thing) and a fast
> connection.  k just makes me steam -- I can't see why they added this at
> all, as it does nothing but annoy people AFAICT.  Why prevent
> disconnected/background tasks?  Just pointless...

  It is slightly less annoying if you see the idea behind it.  This
thread gives a reasonable explanation and how to explicitly background
a process:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=m1lzoa6ocgs.fsf%40syrinx.oankali.net&rnum=19&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dbackground%2Bssh%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26start%3D10%26sa%3DN

(sorry for the long google url...)

  I'm not sure what is a better alternative than just going ahead and
using rcp within a trusted cluster for large file transfers.

       - John