Re: [9fans] /net different from sockets, but better?

[Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>]

I may have some existing code based on npfs that you can use as a
base.  It has the basic semantics down, but had at least one bug and
was somewhat incomplete.  I'll dig around and see if I can find it -
it may be of some use as a reference, particularly for how to deal
with the clone file.

                  -eric

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Rahul Murmuria <rahul.is.also@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am planning on porting the /net concept of Plan9 to Linux.
>
> My Plan:
> Use libfs[1] to write a synthetic filesystem in Linux, much like
> securityfs[2], or /proc. This libfs based code will make calls to the TCP/IP
> stack on the linux, and basically be an alternative to the Linux kernel
> sockets. As a result I will expose networking using /net, instead of POSIX
> to the applications.
>
> My Motivation:
> Glendix[3]
>
> My Question:
> I know that using /net instead of sockets is very different. But is it
> better? Specially from the networking side of things, not from application
> development point of view (which we have already established is simpler, by
> example).
>
> [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/57369/
> [2] http://lwn.net/Articles/153366/
> [3] http://glendix.org/   and   http://glendix.org/glendix_iwp9_2008.pdf
> and    http://www.osnews.com/story/20588/
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Rahul Murmuria
>
>