From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: From: Anant Narayanan To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <2AB9AFC10DDFC15A2A6D27BA@[192.168.1.2]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:08:21 +0100 References: <2AB9AFC10DDFC15A2A6D27BA@[192.168.1.2]> Subject: Re: [9fans] Do we have a catalog of 9P servers? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4a00de0e-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > Nevertheless, the same machinations that allow for transparency in > Plan 9 disallow certain functions that can be naturally provided by > a NAT implementation, or any of a number of software categories that > involve packet filtering/rewriting/inspection. For example, the one > I referred to in the posting you have quoted in your response: load > balancing. Add to the list: rate control, intrusion detection, QoS > earmarking, honeynetting, et cetera ad [put you favorite -um, -am > here]. I wouldn't go so far as to say Plan 9 "disallows" certain functions that are implicit in NAT. As someone mentioned in the thread before, it is certainly possible and rather easy to write something similar to trampoline(8) to perform load balancing. Add in packet analysis to the mix and you have rate control, intrusion detection etc. Plan 9, in the end, is infinitely more malleable than most other OSes :-) -- Anant