[TUHS] is networking different?
pnr at planet.nl
Tue Jul 5 09:37:52 AEST 2022
Thank you for sharing experiences on what worked and what did not. Much appreciated!
As I’m now too much on a tangent of what might have been versus what once was, I’ll follow up with a PM.
> On 4 Jul 2022, at 23:17, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:
> Something like what you mention: open(“/net/inet/any:80”, O_RDWR |
> O_STREAM | O_CREAT, 0600), is actually to be found in an RFC from
> around that time.
> You can do that, but the 1980s tried it and it did not end well.
> What's it mean, for example, when you rename("/net/harv") to
> ("/net/google") -- close and reopen socket? (there's a Lost Talk from,
> I think, Rob, that addressed this very question)
> While it has its flaws, https://9p.io/sys/doc/net/net.html in my view
> is the best example to date of how to get it right. Addresses are
> strings, just like paths -- well, they *are* paths in fact. Some of
> this path-like nature can be seen in the Go net package today.
> Oh, and, as regards how the synthetic file system looks: you never,
> never, ever, put an address in the pathname. That's important.
> Also consider that if you get it right, you can do all the network IO
> you want with cat and echo -- people have written telnet in Plan 9
> with those two commands. And, if you get it wrong, well -- you get
More information about the TUHS