This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
From: kmself@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:43:48 -0700 To: svlug@svlug.org Subject: Re: [svlug] vnc Greg Herlein (gherlein@herlein.com) wrote: > I installed vnc this weekend and it's the best few minutes I ever > spent (well, not counting the first time I downloaded a slackware > disk a long, long time ago... grin). > VNC is the slickest hunk of software I've seen in a LONG time. I > know Rick raves about it here - it was his praises that enticed > me to try it - but rarely does software so far outperform > expectations. Dang, this thing is sweet. > I am really impressed. My KVM switch is very soon going to have > a port free for another linux box, since I can now relegate my NT > box to the closet for headless use... and I don't have to leave > my X desktop at all. :) > http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/ > Worth it. Big time. Incidentally, how are you running VNC? Under Debian, I've got a couple of viewers, xvncviewer and svncviewer, which run under X and (AFAICT) console mode, respectively. I haven't been able to get the svncviewer to work. A "naked" VNC session, *not* piped through an SSH tunnel, is sufficiently responsive that I don't find it annoying. I tried a tunneled VNC session through SSH on the (high speed) local network at work and found that it was distressingly slow, even with blowfish selected as an encryption algorithm. Didn't try running lbxproxy, though I may give that a shot. I've got concerns running X or a GUI environment over a network w/o encryption. When working with GNU/Linux boxen, I'd just as soon run X forwarding in SSH and export individual clients. Introducing Legacy MS Windows somewhat screws this pooch, as clients don't support X and remote display of X apps to Windows isn't directly supported without external software, making VNC or something like it a necessity. How are people addressing the security issue here? ==== Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:19:07 -0700 To: svlug@svlug.org Subject: Re: [svlug] vnc From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> begin kmself@ix.netcom.com quotation: > Introducing Legacy MS Windows somewhat screws this pooch, as clients > don't support X and remote display of X apps to Windows isn't directly > supported without external software, making VNC or something like it a > necessity. Given a Win32 box on your LAN, remote VNC sessions to it are the least of your LAN security worries, yes? === Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 15:48:36 -0700 From: "Jeffrey B. Siegal" <jbs@quiotix.com> To: kmself@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: [svlug] vnc kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > I tried a tunneled VNC session through SSH on the (high > speed) local network at work and found that it was > distressingly slow, even with blowfish selected as an > encryption algorithm. Sounds like you need faster CPUs. > Didn't try running lbxproxy, though I may give that a shot. I don't understand what you're trying to do here. === Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:05:34 -0700 From: "Jeffrey B. Siegal" <jbs@quiotix.com> To: svlug@svlug.org Subject: Re: [svlug] vnc kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > lbxproxy is the low-bandwidth X proxy. It's helpful in runnin X over > low-bandwidth (or high-latency) connections. Right. > May not be applicable to > VNC as both client and server are local, only the display itself is > exported. That's the part I don't understand. If you are running VNC over the net, then lbxproxy won't help you at all. If you are running X over the net, it might, but I doubt it if your network is local and fast. === From: kmself@ix.netcom.com Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:56:08 -0700 To: svlug@svlug.org Subject: Re: [svlug] vnc Jeffrey B. Siegal (jbs@quiotix.com) wrote: > kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > I tried a tunneled VNC session through SSH on the (high > > speed) local network at work and found that it was > > distressingly slow, even with blowfish selected as an > > encryption algorithm. > Sounds like you need faster CPUs. This looks indeed like it may be the problem. Anyone here got experience with Netwinder RM-1? VNC's not the only place it seems to be lagging. Looking for a good benchmarking tool (and some comparative stats for different platforms). === Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 22:34:33 -0700 To: svlug@svlug.org Subject: Re: [svlug] so re we getting free vmware licenses on wednesday From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> begin Bill Jonas quotation: > ...RPMs could probably be found, I suppose.... The good news is that essentially every distribution except for the miniature ones now includes VNC Viewer as prepackaged software. Highly recommended for ongoing access to those nice little Win32 or MacOS packages that you think will always stand between you and routine Linux desktop usage (Quicken, Quickbooks...). By default, VNC connections have negligible security -- but, if you wanted security, you wouldn't have MS-Windows boxes around. _However_ (in some situations), you can also redirect a VNC session over an SSH tunnel, if so desired: http://www.mindbright.se/english/technology/products/mindvnc.html http://www.zip.com.au/~cs/answers/vnc-thru-firewall-via-ssh.txt http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/sshwin.html and http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/sshvnc.html ...which also has the benefit of compressing the bitstream. ===