drlove@well.sf.ca.us (David R. Love) (05/02/91)
My experience has been in OSI and peer-to-peer environments. In looking at the X-world, it seems that it's more the terminal-to-host situation. My question is: What happens to peer-to-peer-based applications that are to run in an X-defined client-server environment? If for example I have a User Agent on my workstation that connects to a Message Transfer Agent on a server and the connection is through X, what is the effect on the p-t-p relationship between the UA and the MTA? X's client-server definition doesn't seem to have the same meaing as client-server in the database world. Or perhaps i just don't see it properly. Any help with the focus would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Dave Love
nazgul@alfalfa.com (Information Junkie) (05/03/91)
> are to run in an X-defined client-server environment? If for example > I have a User Agent on my workstation that connects to a Message Transfer > Agent on a server and the connection is through X, what is the effect on That would be frowned upon. Given the lack of standards in RPCs and the ease of establishing X connections it's far too easy to decide to use X as a generic data transfer mechanism, but it's really not designed for that. A UA<->MTA relationship should be independant of the X connection. In fact it's not at all uncommon for the UA, MTA, MS and Display to all be on different machines. Alfalfa Software, Inc. | Poste: The EMail for Unix nazgul@alfalfa.com | Send Anything... Anywhere 617/646-7703 (voice/fax) | info@alfalfa.com I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.