From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 65341116 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 02:47:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 9C8109D788; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:47:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 945719D698; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:47:06 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 547E79D698; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:47:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9360D9D649 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:47:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546) id DCE0D35E143; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 18:47:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2020 18:47:00 -0800 From: Larry McVoy To: Rob Pike Message-ID: <20200308024700.GE8730@mcvoy.com> References: <20200306224431.D226C18C080@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <3D1DBF45-AE50-4027-8AAA-6C1D97D28D4D@planet.nl> <20200307163935.GA57521@clarinet.employees.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [TUHS] First appearance of named pipes X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" I hear you but sockets are here to stay. Sun tried to get rid of them by going to a STREAMS networking stack (not saying that was in any way a better answer, just different). Didn't work, they had to put sockets back, there was just way too much software written around the socket API. I tried to make a more sane interface and never got to something that handled all the edge cases. Did Plan 9 make it sane? If so, care to say how or point me at something like Masscomp's introduction to network programming? On Sun, Mar 08, 2020 at 01:36:14PM +1100, Rob Pike wrote: > Always bemused me that to get a named local I/O connection one ended > up with "Unix domain (what does that even mean?) sockets" rather than > named pipes, especially since sockets are about as natural a Unix > concept as lawn mowers. I've been told, but haven't confirmed, that > early sockets didn't even support read and write. They still don't > support open and close, and never will. > > Networks are not intrinsically more special than any other I/O > peripheral, but they have become gilded unicorns mounted on rotating > hovercrafts compared to the I/O devices Unix supported before them. > > -rob > > On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 3:48 AM Derek Fawcus > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 01:17:09PM +0100, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > > > > > > Interestingly, Luderer also refers to a 1978 paper by Steve Holmgren (one of the Arpa Unix authors), suggesting ???sockets??? (in today???s parlance) for interproces communication. > > > > Could that simply be bleed over of terminology from the ARPAnet / Internet > > usage, in that "socket" is used to refer to protocol end points? > > > > i.e. see these from 1970: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc54 > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc55 > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc60 > > > > DF -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm