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 685 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2022 22:52:56 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 17 Jun 2022 22:52:56 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B13040D1C; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 08:52:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-io1-xd2e.google.com (mail-io1-xd2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2e]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BDC540D0D for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 08:52:43 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-io1-xd2e.google.com with SMTP id q11so5905797iod.8 for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 15:52:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ipBFBJPKPVumYDZ9oOoQ5r9ax7v36eG55RIQJg5c8ds=; b=g9rltQ3+YXcerOFq3qohpHoBGO7dy+KQleC6Ys/rTF4782qMJYH0qZpimK4gYxtn5s EDOcymLNxi+f4CFpSKwsHrMqoOaIHYjkvVU/b8YF/ylQaXWo4BcOQw9etCtFN1u+VXwl I+Fy35Lv8TQk5qbkfJLP8Mnj+jX0FEE5cZ1ezQziIffRZmvkd685OjrvRUP6eEV0D3ms tleDFzve+kK0dLfW/56fldHX5owY3QztoecF29bT0G1uYoZ5knwSRpvwNAZqcjzTA3vq JykKhNLZKYshQcE26Fg2AZgm4/CIxu6SzRQkZlOInPFPOIwwVKEzR6qJyh3bOgoryy4R W9Pw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ipBFBJPKPVumYDZ9oOoQ5r9ax7v36eG55RIQJg5c8ds=; b=icz4j8LFaUcpSoHsyf7Zbyri18qrbJvQPLEMiwM4sEDZv4uLp0jJYP8WdvrDkhUei3 JYTspyXhDx+LofZsi5o9xwpN5jCKc4yh8FgdNBa4vZU85yFjA7ycDfGkT1jgMv9MR52j EpIVgkBqOGeUvfH5IilYs0GgdbFl2l7Cn57IgdCRlUtv85LkxDd3xc/ia6CaIcQe/xlF 0Lr4AZO/hOg/gGC8FxXgx045AJBgMZGvtoHC0E6MZiynp+qp/PR2mhOZ0jpYNc0A1SUI Nv6JPrwLRiTm1X+YHxJaqEjXbOm+QvImRHGf4ES6Syd8Xd0OQ3io9aDUNpD23Sv0o2y5 Bnaw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8R9qh6sWntLu/fgwpfEsXV7sjrfBC7GzAoBKREepBsIz8wur1w iVCpkQMqvmf7GluXkMfL4vwSaso8651/DZnDOaBL1r7a X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vidSDzch7JgVrEnkL4DR39vtxgh8WwbIIcSQpDTNkNqlMJyBUbNf+kKhmApRsPKVeF/dT1WesgL45sa8Z/VPM= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8b8f:0:b0:649:ec6d:98e9 with SMTP id p15-20020a5d8b8f000000b00649ec6d98e9mr6199910iol.30.1655506362476; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 15:52:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dan Stromberg Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 15:52:31 -0700 Message-ID: To: Bakul Shah Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a8adb405e1ac9c95" Message-ID-Hash: 2F3LWLLRURRGX6LNVCJU3BMLRU76HCTZ X-Message-ID-Hash: 2F3LWLLRURRGX6LNVCJU3BMLRU76HCTZ X-MailFrom: drsalists@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: Sockets vs Streams (was Re: forgotten versions List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --000000000000a8adb405e1ac9c95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 9:24 AM Bakul Shah wrote: > On Jun 16, 2022, at 4:44 PM, George Michaelson wrote: > > > > Sockets (which btw, totally SUCK PUS) were coded into things > > and even (YECHH) made POSIX and IETF spec status. Streams didn't stand > > a chance. > > The stream abstraction is a nice (c)lean abstraction but it doesn't > quite work for things like multicast or datagrams in general. Plan9 > doesn't have sockets but the way it deals with UDP is not simple either. > The complexity is in the protocols themselves. Even at layer 2 (below > the IP layer) the amount of complexity is mind boggling (though I > suppose high-speed backbone switches do all this in hardware!). > I've heard good things about Streams, but never really had a problem with Sockets once I realized that send's and recv's don't necessarily have a 1-1 correspondence. I do think that Sockets need something analogous to stdio though. And I believe inetd allowed you to do that. --000000000000a8adb405e1ac9c95 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 9:24 AM Bakul Sha= h <bakul@iitbombay.org> wr= ote:
On Jun 16, = 2022, at 4:44 PM, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> wrote:
>
> Sockets (which btw, totally SUCK PUS) were coded into things
> and even (YECHH) made POSIX and IETF spec status. Streams didn't s= tand
> a chance.

The stream abstraction is a nice (c)lean abstraction but it doesn't
quite work for things like multicast or datagrams in general. Plan9
doesn't have sockets but the way it deals with UDP is not simple either= .
The complexity is in the protocols themselves. Even at layer 2 (below
the IP layer) the amount of complexity is mind boggling (though I
suppose high-speed backbone switches do all this in hardware!).

I've heard good things about Streams, but neve= r really had a problem with Sockets once I realized that send's and rec= v's don't necessarily have a 1-1 correspondence.

I do think that Sockets need something analogous to stdio though.

And I believe inetd allowed you to do that.

--000000000000a8adb405e1ac9c95--