From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Russ Cox" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] 9P2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010131093143.BA424199FA@mail.cse.psu.edu> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 04:31:36 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 557a5432-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 [I'm just confused trying to follow the argument. Feel free to ignore.] Aren't there two issues here? One is resynchronizing the message stream, so that both sides agree on the message boundaries. The other is resynchronizing the 9P conversation state, so that both sides agree on which tags and fids are in use and what they mean. Something (an underlying transport protocol, say) needs to provide the first capability, but without the second you're still hosed. In an IP environment, you can drop and redial the connection, but if you've got a hard-wired link, you need an explicit restart within the protocol, hence Tsession, no? Russ