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=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, 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 915f87e9 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 02:37:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E3CE49D781; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:36:57 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52C789D698; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:36:31 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="P05pI6XY"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 91C279D698; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:36:28 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f66.google.com (mail-vs1-f66.google.com [209.85.217.66]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA6C79D649 for ; Sun, 8 Mar 2020 12:36:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f66.google.com with SMTP id n6so4026290vsc.3 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 18:36:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=goLFYAlmIOvr6PBQgzA7NKUGB4GXxED/2oL/g7q6Y6U=; b=P05pI6XYn/avJpNlDFUW8EWnk6TXxKvl/hqdTy8zQ/eCGUuY386yM7gbuSdTcRkHj6 DC9HdSO6xBPdhKdnvi7ihnad0ZU3G7TR3N2OLN9tt8y1Noz2De1PBkg4iwqrs2DIN0g4 KWA6q9Q4E6uyn9RfZqgVvqRoHlB6PQ4d1l/j0GneYVagnmFhR69QJv/okrudnnvJC54t /MiWk/+h+TzpXK33shGQoIa1YrhEm3gnK21QjscBKcim1OCTNd8kP4VmmOx2zCeuFKec AGpy3erejgW6jkzJH00rcK2wuE7XPUOV6PKv7O6m+8w+5if31iwSXpuRqq9pvOi1Awan r90Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=goLFYAlmIOvr6PBQgzA7NKUGB4GXxED/2oL/g7q6Y6U=; b=V5IRAeYYRHnhJKqbCFliPST0SFt7+/R3sqybzjWNujN7AQH0iN3IHIZ54DJQp7e8Jp cULRpv8OZbl5hDPqozJ64CvrRZZFhQUGAUBU4RJUrXGWPikM/fNacw8gzNERZuV8OACb 4QH+AwmDZzaQjeiZnsyCNUAuBAmqLRLuHB/Y+HSuY61DNHxu8fbzX76pVlEhWfV4twvf nC6RaX6mzaw1PpKCig2OoI4RavZ1//utYYUtHY3/87i8H6hzEf4o+Zbwi9VrZnbWx4uq AzQGufCzD5yd5wiedtZV4sghieHjpbzDOBocsdx1yJb/XmbC6LzCLilQml8KkIQ2uEYh pNXg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ31N+mouXoWnHE5ICaC3JHHmY2JCQ0/6MYPhAiU4U+GqMCYi+Xh OeY1Gu5dG4SbWjijIGskbisEeKYf2TR//7/GKyr25yss X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuVMOmbWl2GP08rDiMmSWRb5zCWkfkEwo5sKvseqJsGyhXTtoIPhYADHFeGG9sJfdDwI7nKAlUwM93nETTCrnA= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b641:: with SMTP id e1mr6259144vsm.170.1583634985658; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 18:36:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200306224431.D226C18C080@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <3D1DBF45-AE50-4027-8AAA-6C1D97D28D4D@planet.nl> <20200307163935.GA57521@clarinet.employees.org> In-Reply-To: <20200307163935.GA57521@clarinet.employees.org> From: Rob Pike Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2020 13:36:14 +1100 Message-ID: To: Derek Fawcus Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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" 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 (o= ne of the Arpa Unix authors), suggesting =E2=80=99sockets=E2=80=99 (in toda= y=E2=80=99s parlance) for interproces communication. > > Could that simply be bleed over of terminology from the ARPAnet / Interne= t > 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