Re: [9fans] 8c question

["Ronald G. Minnich" <rminnich@lanl.gov>]

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Charles Forsyth wrote:

> not if i start to wonder about the surrounding software, when such
> sloppy assumptions are made in something as important as the interface.  
> i'd already thought, glancing at it months ago, that there seemed to be
> rather a lot of interface, which also made me wonder, but i'd made a
> mental note to revisit it when i had more time.

we have been trying and failing to get the xen guys interested in 9p as 
the backbone comms for inter-domain communication in Xen, both dom0->domU 
and domU->domU. 

What we're lacking is anyone with a time to write the proof-of-concept 
implementation. I wish we could get it done, because the inter-domain 
comms in xen just keep getting more and more complex. 

It's been hard to even argue that you could use the same
open/read/write/close interface for a disk and an ethernet device. "Linux
doesn't do that ...". So we have a disk virtual device and an ethernet
virtual device that are very, very different in implementation, even
though it's basically a 2-way shared-memory fifo queue in each case. I
really think they could be the same.

ron