🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: la.wanted
Article #74

Re: Why don't ISPs offer shell anymore?

#74
From: JC Dill
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:00
50 lines
3209 bytes
On 15 Jan 1997 14:36:37 +0100, paul@bean.xtdnet.nl (Paul Wouters)
expound upon: "Re: Why don't ISPs offer shell anymore?"

>In <32dc32f3.16908507@news.concentric.net> jcdilll@ix.netcom.com (JC Dill) writes:
>
>>This answers the reason that Concentric has accounts with shell access
>>but no compile permission.  If you don't need to compile, Concentric
>
>Interesting. What prevents me from uploading a compiler ?

I am not sure of the mechanics.  I just know that is isn't
permitted/allowed *somehow*.  If you need to run a compiler on a unix
shell machine, the Concentric accout is not for you...
>
>>may have all the shell access you need.  You can get the first month
>>for $1 if you bill it to your credit card, you also get Navigator 3.0
>>free...
>
>You get Netscape for a shell account ????? Interesting ;) We could ofcourse
>just run slirp or term and use netscape, but it seems silly ;)

It isn't *just* a shell account.  It is a shell/PPP account, so you
telnet in and run a shell session, or use a winsock dialer and a
graphical interface like Netscape or Eudora etc.  Many users never
take advantage of the shell, but it is *there* if they need/want to.
>
>Shell accounts are very powerful. That's a reason why most isp's probably
>ownt offer them. And charging is hard, since they will usually try to make
>background jobs, logout and log back in to get the results.
>
Shell accounts are very dangerous, and very CPU usage intensive if
poorly managed (background jobs, jobs running when the user is logged
off, etc.. are often/potentially poor allocations of the ISP's and
Server's resources).  Shell accounts need to be strictly managed, and
the *payoff* is low, compared to the other things an ISP's engineering
staff can be tasked to manage.

>
>
>>http://home.concentric.net for more info.
>
>>jc
>-- 
>"To boldly binary patch commercial programs where no commercial program has
>been binary patched before..". Has a certain ring to it, doesn't it?  
>Now the question is just: "Who is first?" 
>		--- Linus ( A new linux kernel broke the game Abuse)

cute!
Technical Details
Message-ID: <32dd5590.4776519@news.concentric.net>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <5akrer$1e7$1@sun1.sure.net> <frantic-ya02408000R1201970106500001@news.primenet.com> <5bbssq$2dq$1@philippi.alphalink.com> <32DA734A.167EB0E7@net.com> <5bee2m$ahu$1@philippi.alphalink.com> <5bejv3$o2e$2@marina.cinenet.net> <5bfihf$c9n$1@jake.probe.net> <32dc32f3.16908507@news.concentric.net> <paul.853335027@bean>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 106ed4,66ca66afeebaf7d5
X-Google-Attributes: gid106ed4,public
X-Google-Thread: faff9,3b2229014b3f5b24
X-Google-Attributes: gidfaff9,public
X-Google-Thread: f4f5d,66ca66afeebaf7d5
X-Google-Attributes: gidf4f5d,public
X-Google-Thread: 107d03,55985d278fa5ab0b
X-Google-Attributes: gid107d03,public
X-Google-Thread: fdb40,55985d278fa5ab0b
X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb40,public
From: jcdilll@ix.netcom.com (JC Dill)
Subject: Re: Why don't ISPs offer shell anymore?
Date: 1997/01/15
Message-ID: <32dd5590.4776519@news.concentric.net>
X-Deja-AN: 210066062
references: <5akrer$1e7$1@sun1.sure.net> <frantic-ya02408000R1201970106500001@news.primenet.com> <5bbssq$2dq$1@philippi.alphalink.com> <32DA734A.167EB0E7@net.com> <5bee2m$ahu$1@philippi.alphalink.com> <5bejv3$o2e$2@marina.cinenet.net> <5bfihf$c9n$1@jake.probe.net> <32dc32f3.16908507@news.concentric.net> <paul.853335027@bean>
organization: Concentric Internet Services
newsgroups: la.wanted,la.general,ca.general,alt.internet.access.wanted,linux.admin.isp