From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <5fa9fbfe115a9cd5a81d0feefe413192@quintile.net> <4fa1305e0f56a0ef89c2e05320fa5997@coraid.com> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:59:55 -0700 Message-ID: From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cdf1c40e41efb048563e4f7 Subject: Re: [9fans] A simple experiment Topicbox-Message-UUID: 12e567a8-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --000e0cdf1c40e41efb048563e4f7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Tim Newsham wrote: > But then I start to wonder why we feel we want to compete with HTTP when it >> already works, and is still fairly simple. Nothing wrong with improving >> 9P >> I suppose, but what's so wrong with HTTP transfers that it warrants >> changing >> our beloved resource sharing protocol? Maybe I'm being too practical, and >> not feeling adventurous or something :-) >> > > See the "op" papers for their justification. > Will do! > > Dave >> > > Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | thenewsh.blogspot.com > > --000e0cdf1c40e41efb048563e4f7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Tim Ne= wsham <newsham@lav= a.net> wrote:
But then I start to wonder why we feel we want to compete with HTTP when it=
already works, and is still fairly simple. =A0Nothing wrong with improving = 9P
I suppose, but what's so wrong with HTTP transfers that it warrants cha= nging
our beloved resource sharing protocol? =A0Maybe I'm being too practical= , and
not feeling adventurous or something :-)

See the "op" papers for their justification.

Will do!
=A0

Dave

Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | thenewsh.blogspot.com


--000e0cdf1c40e41efb048563e4f7--