Re: [9fans] File/cpu servers..?

Re: [9fans] File/cpu servers..?

[Russ Cox]

  I'm also awaiting a concise set of instructions for installing a
  self-contained terminal/CPU-server/disk-server. It would be ideal if
  WORM backups, DNS, and the whole set of Plan9 services could be
  functional on one system. I think people at the Labs are working on
  getting out a basic document.

I plan to have such an addendum to the
Getting Started document late tonight.

For now, I will note the following.
The intended use of the system is to have
separate machines for everything -- a file
server, a cpu server, and terminals.
That said, it is probably unrealistic
to expect single users to dedicate a
minimum of three machines to get a Plan 9
network going.

There are ways to have a combination
cpu/auth/file server via kfs, and
in fact I configured one last night and
am using a terminal booted from it at
the moment.  You currently can't have
WORM-style backups on kfs, though.  For
that you need to run a dedicated file
server, as the WORM management code
lives in the standalone file server code
only.

  I did this, replaced /386/9pcdisk with the resulting file, and also
  ran gzip 9pcdisk to standard out (naming the results 9pcdisk.gz) for a

You'll get an even smaller 9pcdisk.gz if you
do mk 'CONF=pcdisk' 9pcdisk.gz, which strips
the binary en route to gzip.  mk 'CONF=pcdisk' install
installs the kernels too, although as discussed
earlier, you will want to comment out the line
in /sys/src/9/pc/mkfile that tries to toss them
over to "dinar".

Russ

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[Richard Uhtenwoldt]

Russ Cox writes:

>The intended use of the system is to have
>separate machines for everything -- a file
>server, a cpu server, and terminals.
>That said, it is probably unrealistic
>to expect single users to dedicate a
>minimum of three machines to get a Plan 9
>network going.

I wish some enterprising Plan 9 hacker would
sell accounts on an expertly-maintained Plan 9
network and makes those accounts available via
a reliable connection to the internet.  Per
analogy with an "application service provider"
(ASP), such an enterprising hacker would be a
"Plan 9 file- and cpu-service provider" (9SP).

to enjoy a rich Plan 9 experience, a home user
would need only an account with the 9SP,
internet connectivity and a Plan 9 terminal
able to connect to the internet.  if I
understand correctly, the home user would be
relieved not only of the burden of installing
and maintaining u9fs(4) or fs(4) and backing up
its data, but also of the burden of installing
and upgrading (most? all?) applications.

is there some technical obstacle to this
working?  in particular, can a terminal use the
public internet to connect to a cpu server and
a file server?

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[Wesley Felter]

in article 200006160020.RAA09589@ohio.river.org, Richard Uhtenwoldt at
ru@ohio.river.org wrote on 6/15/00 7:45 PM:

> I wish some enterprising Plan 9 hacker would
> sell accounts on an expertly-maintained Plan 9
> network and makes those accounts available via
> a reliable connection to the internet.  Per
> analogy with an "application service provider"
> (ASP), such an enterprising hacker would be a
> "Plan 9 file- and cpu-service provider" (9SP).

Speaking of ASPs and mutually hostile users, what kind of resource
management does Plan 9 have? Does it have some sort of hierachical CPU,
disk, and network scheduling? Does it overcommit VM?

I looked at the papers directory on the Web site, but nothing there looked
like it might answer these questions.

Wesley Felter - wesf@cs.utexas.edu - http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/wesf/

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[rob pike]

    Speaking of ASPs and mutually hostile users, what kind of resource
    management does Plan 9 have? Does it have some sort of hierachical CPU,
    disk, and network scheduling? Does it overcommit VM?

Plan 9 doesn't do anything very sophisticated about resource management.
It should probably be smarter in general.  We're still trying to come up
with
a satisfying way to administer kernel memory - how to manage the balance
between kernel and user memory.

It doesn't overcommit VM, however.

-rob

Re: [9fans] File/cpu servers..?

[Ish Rattan]

Russ Cox wrote:

>   I'm also awaiting a concise set of instructions for installing a
>   self-contained terminal/CPU-server/disk-server. It would be ideal if
>   WORM backups, DNS, and the whole set of Plan9 services could be
>   functional on one system. I think people at the Labs are working on
>   getting out a basic document.
>
> I plan to have such an addendum to the
> Getting Started document late tonight.
>
> For now, I will note the following.
> The intended use of the system is to have
> separate machines for everything -- a file
> server, a cpu server, and terminals.
> That said, it is probably unrealistic
> to expect single users to dedicate a
> minimum of three machines to get a Plan 9
> network going.
>
> There are ways to have a combination
> cpu/auth/file server via kfs, and
> in fact I configured one last night and
> am using a terminal booted from it at

The details for this will be great!!

- ishwar

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[Russ Cox]

>is there some technical obstacle to this
>working?  in particular, can a terminal use the
>public internet to connect to a cpu server and
>a file server?

As long as you can get IL packets
through, you're golden.
I had TCP working once - it
wouldn't be that hard to
do again.  Just add aux/fcall into
/sys/src/9/boot/configip.c.

On a related note, I set up a standalone
cpu/auth/file server last night for
personal use and took notes.
A polished version can now be found
at the end of
plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/start.html,.ps,.pdf.

Russ

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[Richard Uhtenwoldt]

I asked:

>>can a terminal use the
>>public internet to connect to a cpu server and
>>a file server?

Russ Cox writes:

>As long as you can get IL packets
>through, you're golden.

I admin my own Linux box, and I am capable of learning to admin my own
Plan 9 network, but I would rather become a Plan 9 user and perhaps even
a Plan 9 app programmer before learning to admin my own Plan 9
network. in fact learning to admin a Plan 9 network is rather low on my
list of things to achieve.  it took a long time to learn how to admin my
own Linux box well and I expect the learning curve for adminning a Plan
9 network is even longer because the install program is less mature than
eg Suse's Yast and because Plan 9 does not have package managers like
RPM and Debian's Apt or config managers like GNU Autoconf.

so, I am willing to pay someone with a well-adminstered Plan 9 network
connected to the internet (residential cable internet connection
probably does not suffice) $20 or 30/mo for Plan 9 cpu and file and
email services.  ie, you give me an account and email address on your
network and my Plan 9 terminal server at home connects to it over the
public internet.  the first use I put my account to might be to read the
mailing lists I subscribe to.

I might be willing to pay a one-time account-creation fee.

of course the network I would most like an account on is the one inside
Bell Labs <grin> but I figure there are rules against that.

I realize that in many ways Plan 9 is a less mature environment than
Linux is (eg, much fewer apps), and I am willing to put up with the
hardships that entails.

in particular, (though its underlying security architecture is more
sound) because Plan 9 has not been beaten on for ten years by thousands
of teenaged boys, it is probably more vulnerable than Unix/Linux to
breakins and DoS attacks when connected to the public internet,
resulting in outages.  that does not sour me as long as uptime is at
least, oh, 80%.

at first I envision myself using an almost-stateless Plan 9 terminal
like they do at Bell Labs, but over the years I would like to see things
evolve so that data I wish to keep from prying eyes is stored and code
that I run regularly is cached on my desktop (because disk drives are
still cheaper and more responsive than public internet bandwidth).

most "most-upstream" internet connectivity provider is currently Verio
but I would probably be able to switch to whichever one you use so as to
avoid annoying latency at the network access points.  (I know from my
experience telnetting over the public internet that latency is a bigger
issue than bandwidth.)  also, your server(s) probably needs to be in
North America.

one of my motives for pursuing this way of working with Plan 9 is my
belief in the eventual dominance of "one-click" software installation
and upgrading (cf, Sun's recent announcement of the Java Web Start spec
and the rise of the "application-service provider") and my desire
eventually to see Plan 9-based apps and services available via
"one-click".

I am in no particular rush to start using Plan 9 --my interest is long
term-- but if you think you might be able to be my "Plan 9 service provider"
months from now, please pipe up next few days.  (in a few days, I go
on vacation for a month.)

Richard Uhtenwoldt

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[James G. Stallings II]

Dude you ROCK.

Now if I can can stand working long enough to get some time off to
play....


-James

> On a related note, I set up a standalone
> cpu/auth/file server last night for
> personal use and took notes.
> A polished version can now be found
> at the end of
> plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/start.html,.ps,.pdf.
>
> Russ


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

Re: [9fans] File/cpu service provider

[forsyth]

>> ... config managers like GNU Autoconf.

it's partly because Plan 9 does not need and never ought to need `Autoconf'
that it is so much easier to program, let alone  `admin' than current UNIX derivatives/variants/clones.
<diatribe about autoconf, configure, and #ifdef removed>