CVS update: tng/source/passdb
joed at pc-ltd.co.uk
Tue Jan 8 17:47:02 GMT 2002
Peter Samuelson wrote:
> The whole point of RPC languages is to use a client/server paradigm but
> present it to the application developer as a library interface
> paradigm. With RPC you don't "communicate with a server", you "call a
> function you've defined which happens to be on the server".
So the transport mechanisms themselves become transparent. However
maintaining a flat structure to achieve this is surely more intensive and
> Note that client/server and RPC are to some extent interchangeable -
> you can implement an RPC protocol using a client/server paradigm. This
> is more or less what Samba does. (The converse is a bit harder to
> imagine, though.)
so something akin-
client->RPC-local ---> Server --> RPC-remote ( do action ).
Server -> RPC-Remote --- > Client --> RPC-local.
> MS Mail is not usually considered to be client/server, because there
> isn't a "mail server" process - just a file server which can be used
> for many things outside MS Mail.
um, yes Bad example. ;-)
> Peter, already regretting getting into this thread
Sorry, Just trying to get my head around it.
More information about the samba-technical