From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.236.154.227 with SMTP id h63cs538544yhk; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:20 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <9front+bncCMnN582LARDI9vHwBBoEnMjLqQ@googlegroups.com> Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of 9front+bncCMnN582LARDI9vHwBBoEnMjLqQ@googlegroups.com designates 10.221.13.134 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.221.13.134; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of 9front+bncCMnN582LARDI9vHwBBoEnMjLqQ@googlegroups.com designates 10.221.13.134 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=9front+bncCMnN582LARDI9vHwBBoEnMjLqQ@googlegroups.com; dkim=pass header.i=9front+bncCMnN582LARDI9vHwBBoEnMjLqQ@googlegroups.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.221.13.134]) by 10.221.13.134 with SMTP id pm6mr127078vcb.28.1310489420290 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-sasl-enc:date:from:to:subject:message-id :in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=AxSlPz0ZRrV6uvYdG6Naldx1fwlDXuk1GY02m1Do3Dc=; b=1foiEZdtzyS5OkiS72Q+ctx0QfLAKL+ntBotirPE+BY0ZKZ+9EAxZB8IQ+g3r4ti6u XCpWTMCLtG9YTueb/ECjrnAqBQ/vEGKx4dZ0uINJT3EQbgUN0aSQJQ913uFjDfElv6FJ J302IVVggRZeW26QcPLmgoHPr8ljhbd237Wus= Received: by 10.221.13.134 with SMTP id pm6mr42299vcb.28.1310489416533; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:16 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: 9front@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.52.96.197 with SMTP id du5ls190309vdb.1.gmail; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.88.45 with SMTP id bd13mr34329vdb.15.1310489416060; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.88.45 with SMTP id bd13mr34328vdb.15.1310489416052; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out5.smtp.messagingengine.com (out5.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a10si11821301vdt.0.2011.07.12.09.50.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:50:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eekee57@fastmail.fm designates 66.111.4.29 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.111.4.29; Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.44]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFFAB20506 for <9front@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:50:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:50:14 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: zsKutLivja+DYzFszUqRXaWl3dyygxu4xIAeBlVcbJla 1310489414 Received: from lahti.ethans.dre.am (cpc5-lanc4-0-0-cust349.3-3.cable.virginmedia.com [81.102.241.94]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5ACD1401BCE for <9front@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:50:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:50:13 +0100 From: Ethan Grammatikidis To: 9front@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: streaming 9p Message-ID: <20110712175013.4cb39d62@lahti.ethans.dre.am> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.18.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: eekee57@fastmail.fm X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eekee57@fastmail.fm designates 66.111.4.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eekee57@fastmail.fm; dkim=pass header.i=@messagingengine.com Reply-To: 9front@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list 9front@googlegroups.com; contact 9front+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: <9front.googlegroups.com> X-Google-Group-Id: 831096995978 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: 9front@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 02:21:38 +0200 Uriel wrote: > If this streaming-9p stuff is what I remember from a while ago, which > I have been trying to erase from my brains ever since: > > It completely breaks the 9P and Plan 9 model namespaces and network > transparency, please keep that idiotic crap as far away as possible. Wasn't pipelining a better idea to the same end, and doesn't 9p have pipelining support already, but the fileservers don't generally implement it? If so, perhaps we should write pipeline support into the fileservers, particularly those we most want to share over long distance networks: the actual file storage FSs. There aren't too many of them.