From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
References: <e9dcbb4575bd9e996107205d6ef24358@terzarima.net>
In-Reply-To: <e9dcbb4575bd9e996107205d6ef24358@terzarima.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8C148)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <319CCC8A-7CC8-4814-8608-FFFA624C04FD@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Nemo <nemo.mbox@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 17:55:15 +0100
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] streams
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b26104d6-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

why not mux tcp instead?

On Feb 20, 2011, at 2:35 AM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:

> i think it might be helpful to have a transport protocol along the lines
> of Bryan Ford's SST, which allows a stream to create substreams
> with separate flow control and other attributes. a primary 9p stream
> might create a substream for a large Tread or Twrite.
> the facility could be emulated for existing protocols, although addressing=

> puzzles make that trickier that one might like. the demo SST implementatio=
n
> was built on UDP. a service to resolve addressing puzzles might be useful t=
oo.
>=20