From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 22:13:08 -0500 Message-ID: <9511f83e0902061913t2ff2c26bvd446ffe7ed8c30a0@mail.gmail.com> From: Rahul Murmuria To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5986045a78f04624b846a Subject: [9fans] /net different from sockets, but better? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 98e05914-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --001636c5986045a78f04624b846a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 --001636c5986045a78f04624b846a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am planning on porting the /net concept of Plan9 to Linux.

My Pla= n:
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/ &nb= sp; and   http://glendix.org/glendix_iwp9_2008.pdf  &nb= sp; and    http://www.osnews.com/story/20588/

Regards,

--
Rahul Murmuria

--001636c5986045a78f04624b846a-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9511f83e0902061913t2ff2c26bvd446ffe7ed8c30a0@mail.gmail.com> References: <9511f83e0902061913t2ff2c26bvd446ffe7ed8c30a0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 07:47:08 -0600 Message-ID: From: Eric Van Hensbergen To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] /net different from sockets, but better? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9932a462-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 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 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 > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9511f83e0902061913t2ff2c26bvd446ffe7ed8c30a0@mail.gmail.com> References: <9511f83e0902061913t2ff2c26bvd446ffe7ed8c30a0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 13:46:44 -0500 Message-ID: <3aaafc130902081046r6fc2797du3490eee4580ff660@mail.gmail.com> From: "J.R. Mauro" To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] /net different from sockets, but better? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 99f0715e-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Since I'm new here, hi everyone! On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Rahul Murmuria wrote: > I am planning on porting the /net concept of Plan9 to Linux. > I've been thinking about this for a few months. If you'd like help, let me know, I'd be more than happy to pitch in. > 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 > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <9511f83e0902061913t2ff2c26bvd446ffe7ed8c30a0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 14:03:52 -0500 Message-ID: <9511f83e0902081103j358842efxefcf6c438cee17dd@mail.gmail.com> From: Rahul Murmuria To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] /net different from sockets, but better? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 99f8cd40-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Hello Eric! On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote: > > I may have some existing code based on npfs that you can use as a > base. I asked a friend about npfs. Well, you are probably using v9fs, and you are wrapping over sockets. Not what I intend to do, but like you said, it could help. > 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. Sounds great! Although I am working in kernel space, please let me know if you have something for me. > > -eric Regards, -- Rahul Murmuria