From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <066f7762c9fee5553130692750b99425@quanstro.net>
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Sun,  6 Jul 2008 15:36:38 -0400
To: rminnich@gmail.com, 9fans@9fans.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9vx dns funny
Topicbox-Message-UUID: dc4b8d32-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> > personally, i feel it would be more useful to be
> > able to use plan 9's native network stack.  but
> > i'm biased.  i want to send aoe/cec/il packets.
> >
>
> Part of the reason I have not stopped using lguest, although now I use
> both 9vx and lguest.
>
> You could write a plan 9 device for vx that drives raw frames to linux
> I suppose.

i was trying to say that was one of two potential ways to go.
the question is, which way is 9vx going.  or,
- is there any reason writing #l for 9vx is not a good idea
technically; and
- is #l something that might have a chance to become part of
9vx?

- erik

p.s. wild idea: 9pxevxload.