From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
References: <e9dcbb4575bd9e996107205d6ef24358@terzarima.net>
	<319CCC8A-7CC8-4814-8608-FFFA624C04FD@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=siEehhAmVhvvWWeH7q3g83A59myAjeL2y4MZU@mail.gmail.com>
	<96B1444A-B40A-4F42-A387-1129C87D1387@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <96B1444A-B40A-4F42-A387-1129C87D1387@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8C148)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <E85E1C40-0321-48B1-9CC5-2F913CAEC117@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Nemo <nemo.mbox@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 00:25:38 +0100
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] streams
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b27a4a86-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025


> i did read it before asking, and i'm still wondering why
> not mux tcp instead (provided you dont want/need that extra feature
> or dont implement it that way)
>
>
> On Feb 20, 2011, at 10:59 PM, Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Nemo <nemo.mbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> why not mux tcp instead?
>>
>> See the paper.  Among other things, independent flow control
>> on the different sub-streams.
>>
>> http://www.brynosaurus.com/pub/net/sst-abs.html