From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 15842 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2022 17:06:54 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 28 Jun 2022 17:06:54 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BA4140CD1; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 03:06:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-pf1-f180.google.com (mail-pf1-f180.google.com [209.85.210.180]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32CA240CD0 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 03:06:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f180.google.com with SMTP id t21so12594707pfq.1 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:06:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Pf4KL0eIyHMBYkWHqC15Zs7JU6GwgNQXr/QUPXWcRb0=; b=NWuQoD1SENvySYOvFZDvTvE4OjZfrELCamGkpLStDYgeM4FXRPQNrVoS/oUOl2CGx2 Zhw7WufVV9wyl4WNUJyx8cOWZNru9XRPXGBTXyMYVmDPwGWK7Y0VPf7eLBc1JCFPCgqX go/0QNQLKqq9v2OSzoUVG5ezBlNJTxQXp4u1MEV/2S6/fqaPuJWMGaJtqmKxB6TH4O7e 0OCGKoW1YRal8UGCQcVc2IFCBCGXUIE3e6XZaJON6cSlg7INl6423bi+cRdIcZUHnIp6 KhiQik50zhMQFbAUJS1pzbURnoJdCBG5e+BwSXvesF9Im6/6mHcx6IuGk9gjtXdrmOSV tNlQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Pf4KL0eIyHMBYkWHqC15Zs7JU6GwgNQXr/QUPXWcRb0=; b=EzB5MHA3Mq1wFbarKXyi4QpBomAwDIXx4ovTWSpCWiYnpLMdzeJ0bpat+ldnTj9uAL /EQbIbl+06pwUMIK7iatCXicJf2hPTMvCCJUMcBMHTOOVY/e3uFtxekMKbhb0TxseVdk eCrSzEwtyWeDouV736lusv2ifE7L/gvTqb4stAWtkTkA8Q5bLrU9aTTnpL01ZTK7P/Rj kEQFjIp13cSGDkVSY194I+Xp8baG2Dm9koMHgsy1wOpcjWQ9S1QY0knTRJUuIH914VuC Zza+W79tmxA0ZKCwl07dfQIbF+htmNxcAWNI/qPa6G5Kor3YB584vkugXXLLA0yV5tut zJCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+yFLyvRceFIUsRXmQ4BUkhAyzwZN00La4wrXuV8/06D/L9/3VU ZrYmjFLWyu3mkh397cA0yD/HOxFthQw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tQs+N3rdZE7GDxxOugQtu5ZYIAkKz8PbgrM5WX6DujPTKkaNU1eqrcDUCVD+i5WwsHCMqNVA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:751c:0:b0:40c:f042:5686 with SMTP id q28-20020a63751c000000b0040cf0425686mr18031035pgc.462.1656435928424; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (ip68-2-246-115.ph.ph.cox.net. [68.2.246.115]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t7-20020a1709027fc700b0016a2a8cc4b4sm9644933plb.140.2022.06.28.10.05.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:05:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Adam Thornton Message-Id: <76DD5063-3817-4550-980A-66E728DFD634@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_76D394CC-F811-4AFD-8D4B-7CFD92F8FDAD" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.100.31\)) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 10:05:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: To: Marc Donner References: <2803DC51-6CBC-4257-B40C-8A559C27CAE3@planet.nl> <20220625230939.GG19404@mcvoy.com> <0CA3B3AA-6491-47A5-843D-CDF2F3A74659@cfcl.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.100.31) Message-ID-Hash: XVHWM6KHHMN6YXYSILQQSPQZY75UDNJK X-Message-ID-Hash: XVHWM6KHHMN6YXYSILQQSPQZY75UDNJK X-MailFrom: athornton@gmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tuhs.tuhs.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Research Datakit notes List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --Apple-Mail=_76D394CC-F811-4AFD-8D4B-7CFD92F8FDAD Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > On Jun 28, 2022, at 6:13 AM, Marc Donner = wrote: >=20 > What I don't understand is whether Rob's observation about networking = is *fundamental* to the space or *incidental* to the implementation. I = would love to be educated on that. And there it is! THAT was the sentence--well, ahort paragraph--that = jogged my memory as to why this seemed familiar. If you go back to _The Unix-Hater's Handbook_ (I know, I know, bear with = me), one of the things I noticed and pointed out in my review = (https://athornton.dreamwidth.org/14272.html) is how many of the targets = of hatred, twenty years down the line, turned out to be unix-adjacent, = and not fundamental. In the book, these were things like Usenet and sendmail.cf (indeed, = those were the two big ones). But the current discussion: is the thing we don't like Berkeley Sockets? = Is it TCP/IP itself? Is the the lack of a Unixy abstraction layer over = some lower-level technology? To what degree is it inherent? I mean, obviously, to some degree it's all three, and I think a large = but fairly unexamined part of it is that TCP/IP these days almost always = at least pretends to be sitting on top of Ethernet at the bottom...but = of course Classic Ethernet largely died in the...early 2000s, I = guess?...when even extremely cheap home multiple-access-devices became = switches rather than hubs. Some sort of inter-machine networking is clearly inherent in a modern = concept of Unix. I think we're stuck with the sockets interface and IP, = whether we like them or not. They don't bother me a great deal, but, = yes, they do not feel as unixy as, say, /dev/tcp does. But the = interesting thing is that I think that is Unix-adjacent or, like the UHH = distate for Unix filesystems, it's at least incidental and could be = replaced if the desire arose. And I think we already have the answer = about what the abstraction is, albeit at an application rather than the = kernel level. To answer Rob's question: I think the abstraction is now much farther up = the stack. To a pretty good first approximation, almost all = applications simply definte their own semantics on top of HTTP(S) (OK, = OK, Websockets muddy the waters again) and three-to-five verbs. There's = an incantation to establish a circuit (or a "session" if you're under = the age of 50, I guess), and then you GET, DELETE, and at least one of = PUT/POST/PATCH, for "read", "unlink", and "write". This does seem to be = a more record-oriented (kids these days get snippy if you call them = "records" rather than "objects" but w/e) format than a stream of bytes = (or at least you put an abstraction layer in between your records and = the stream-of-octets that's happening). This is certainly not efficient at a wire protocol level, but it's a = fairly small cognitive burden for people who just want to write = applications that communicate with each other. Adam= --Apple-Mail=_76D394CC-F811-4AFD-8D4B-7CFD92F8FDAD Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

On Jun 28, 2022, at 6:13 AM, Marc Donner <marc.donner@gmail.com> wrote:

What I don't = understand is whether Rob's observation about networking is = *fundamental* to the space or *incidental* to the implementation.  = I would love to be educated on that.

And there it is!  THAT was the = sentence--well, ahort paragraph--that jogged my memory as to why this = seemed familiar.

If you go back to = _The Unix-Hater's Handbook_ (I know, I know, bear with me), one of the = things I noticed and pointed out in my review (https://athornton.dreamwidth.org/14272.html) is how many = of the targets of hatred, twenty years down the line, turned out to be = unix-adjacent, and not fundamental.

In= the book, these were things like Usenet and sendmail.cf (indeed, those = were the two big ones).

But the = current discussion: is the thing we don't like Berkeley Sockets? =  Is it TCP/IP itself?  Is the the lack of a Unixy abstraction = layer over some lower-level technology?  To what degree is it = inherent?

I mean, obviously, to some = degree it's all three, and I think a large but fairly unexamined part of = it is that TCP/IP these days almost always at least pretends to be = sitting on top of Ethernet at the bottom...but of course Classic = Ethernet largely died in the...early 2000s, I guess?...when even = extremely cheap home multiple-access-devices became switches rather than = hubs.

Some sort of inter-machine = networking is clearly inherent in a modern concept of Unix.  I = think we're stuck with the sockets interface and IP, whether we like = them or not.  They don't bother me a great deal, but, yes, they do = not feel as unixy as, say, /dev/tcp does.  But the interesting = thing is that I think that is Unix-adjacent or, like the UHH distate for = Unix filesystems, it's at least incidental and could be replaced if the = desire arose.  And I think we already have the answer about what = the abstraction is, albeit at an application rather than the kernel = level.

To answer Rob's question: I = think the abstraction is now much farther up the stack.  To a = pretty good first approximation, almost all applications simply definte = their own semantics on top of HTTP(S) (OK, OK, Websockets muddy the = waters again) and three-to-five verbs.  There's an incantation to = establish a circuit (or a "session" if you're under the age of 50, I = guess), and then you GET, DELETE, and at least one of PUT/POST/PATCH, = for "read", "unlink", and "write".  This does seem to be a more = record-oriented (kids these days get snippy if you call them "records" = rather than "objects" but w/e) format than a stream of bytes (or at = least you put an abstraction layer in between your records and the = stream-of-octets that's happening).

This is certainly not efficient at a wire protocol = level, but it's a fairly small cognitive burden for people who just want = to write applications that communicate with each other.

Adam
= --Apple-Mail=_76D394CC-F811-4AFD-8D4B-7CFD92F8FDAD--