From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux
From: forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="upas-lvgjzssbkezcyjiqgxjkijzbgx"
Message-Id: <20011120234856.BD7E719A7C@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:48:49 +0000
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 25eb6f3e-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--upas-lvgjzssbkezcyjiqgxjkijzbgx
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>>1.  It doesn't cope well with long networks (it hasn't
>>had the chance to be tuned to the same degree as TCP).

there are of course two ways of interpreting that last part...


--upas-lvgjzssbkezcyjiqgxjkijzbgx
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu>
Received: from punt-1.mail.demon.net by mailstore for forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk
          id 1006299751:10:10198:23; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:42:31 GMT
Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by punt-1.mail.demon.net
           id aa1010309; 20 Nov 2001 23:42 GMT
Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.30.6])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP
	id 35E0A19A6D; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:09:13 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com (ampl.com [204.178.31.2])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with SMTP id 8D66B199E4
	for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:08:09 -0500 (EST)
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20011120220809.8D66B199E4@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.7
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
List-Help: <mailto:9fans-request@cse.psu.edu?subject=help>
List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu>
List-Archive: <http://lists.cse.psu.edu/archives/9fans/>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:08:05 -0500

OK, OK, here's why IL is deprecated:

1.  It doesn't cope well with long networks (it hasn't
had the chance to be tuned to the same degree as TCP).

2.  It's a headache to maintain.

3.  The new protocol (9P2000) doesn't depend on record
boundaries being preserved; there is basically no dependence
on IL in the new system other than the current fileserver
implementation, which is about to be overhauled (RSN!).

--upas-lvgjzssbkezcyjiqgxjkijzbgx--