| |||||||||||||
Rethinking remote displayRethinking remote displayPosted Nov 5, 2010 21:48 UTC (Fri) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)Parent article: LPC: Life after X I don't think that we should just give up on remote transparency, though it might be structured quite differently in the future. Also, I don't think that the VNC approach, which just keeps two bitmaps in sync, is going to be an adequate replacement. We may still find ourselves in a situation where we have a central server with thousands of processors, a remote user with a highly capable GPU, a limited bandwidth connection and complex 3D objects to display (maybe the user is doing mechanical CAD, or experimenting with protein folding as part of drug development). If we take a model-view-controller view, the model is on the central server and the view/controller portion is partly on both, and we want to communicate manipulations on 3D objects across the network as efficiently as possible. One approach might just be to do OpenGL calls as RPC calls across the network, and use something more X-like to send the user's gestures (mouse clicks, keystrokes, multitouch) in the other direction. But it would be best if done in such a way that applications work over the network by default, without special coding by the application developer, because the framework supports it. "Just do it in the browser" seems a step backward from the security point of view; the HTTP server isn't running as me.
(Log in to post comments)
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 5, 2010 22:22 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Network transparency kicks ass. It's certainly a killer feature for X.
but there are things that could be better.... Like session management. With Windows and RDP/etc or VNC I can disconnect and reconnect again later without interruption. That's something you cannot do with X (at least the way it is now).
SPICE kicks ass. As far as I can tell it's much faster then even ICA, which blows X and VNC out of the water. I wonder if there was someway to integrate Spice into Wayland.
Like maybe have a Gallium driver that outputs to Spice instead of to VGA out or something crazy like that.
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 6, 2010 0:42 UTC (Sat) by Lennie (subscriber, #49641) [Link]
SPICE and Wayland are developed/owned/whatever by the same company RedHat so it should in theory be possible for the developers to talk to each other, right ? ;-)
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 6, 2010 7:41 UTC (Sat) by rossburton (subscriber, #7254) [Link]
Actually the main Wayland developer is employed by Intel now.
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 6, 2010 1:55 UTC (Sat) by Lennie (subscriber, #49641) [Link]
SPICE does look pretty efficient network wise. Although I think it is currently pretty tied to kvm/qemu, but I'm not sure.
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 14, 2010 23:23 UTC (Sun) by alon (guest, #71176) [Link]
It is tied to qemu (not really to kvm, although we don't run it on anything else), but should be possible to make run without qemu - although it would require some changes to the design (right now it is built on the trio guest-host-client, if you remove the host the structure changes a little). bandwidth efficiency wise it should be the same.
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 5, 2010 22:42 UTC (Fri) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]
> "Just do it in the browser" seems a step backward from the security point of view; the HTTP server isn't running as me.
But why not? You can run an HTTP server as you. And then ideally you'd want to use some token-passing mechanism to prove to the server that you are you. Like, as browsers already implement, Kerberos. Maybe with the added detail of running a local KDC on every machine, as Apple does, to avoid needing to setup central kerberos infrastructure.
Rethinking remote display Posted Nov 5, 2010 23:30 UTC (Fri) by rwmj (subscriber, #5474) [Link] Exactly. I used remote X all the time, and this "post X" whatever stuff is simply not going to be useful to me. And if they think Mac OS X is some sort of model, "just run X on top", then it's not -- X support is a clunky second-class citizen, and all the native apps are not network transparent so not nearly as useful as they could be. Rich.
|
|||||||||||||