From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,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 35069704 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 15:36:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 61683A217B; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 01:36:23 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94550A2158; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 01:36:05 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4E5CDA2152; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 00:20:10 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ed1-f52.google.com (mail-ed1-f52.google.com [209.85.208.52]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 968AEA214E for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 00:20:04 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f52.google.com with SMTP id z12-v6so10911251edp.7 for ; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 07:20:04 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=N4SxGGGNjPPAzKBGxcGAc1UvhS0xq5DcLlMuwTbsqvg=; b=W4FNt0Lharb0LdIc7ZTDiDUGTv8ay6ZS1V08zKPJzIGr2WBmhb6hwO2Ej8XOj3Xwut r0X/mX5WnMl+PY2jNHlbv8yjCnXBQi7eY+aLtYq/ap0V8fklAYHpBJa0mI7jJggKk0T/ p1TAmMpJSAjAZAlbz+jqk8StJa5nhRgFNh5F67/pid52nRtiM7y5EPnBVQJ5devsLU3v +DimDSqXdQRNF6Dp5Xm0BwPRvGXSZyhnmwNR+tzLhi/vlAzGS6r/NnPcocT4kBGu/11P qNAoqOTcDoPr1G9qOi2E2w/hGISEDwZStoSwlx16k8Pdn1i5HGEa+cg+oPtHyDrqGGeG jYhg== 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; bh=N4SxGGGNjPPAzKBGxcGAc1UvhS0xq5DcLlMuwTbsqvg=; b=tz7zn21FhQAPiPuk6PqM/3U8WTXygxuiBJCXsH6NOi0gF9a213vXcE7nI+tjij+hEN EFYqg9vD9x4+spNeP37d4ijRaGEP7f6IQ17IzRKDmw9l2hulL7UdBuPl615isG4Kb3mI ZdAU3JcB606mSIIw413wdYYaUJWCWTG23a/xCHWvV+6tFIlk0pGeG5XNA4Q3vsOEIuh5 KBFR5+Lf6Sbm7T59p0sukoC+PQ5eX0z3tkdrX1b0hSs1GqXuefyxFdqE8zWZSrhfXzGJ QAONqYhJwK61mZmrbEeXPvkcn0x1VpmZUI4d3givtFgiUZaUtcyuEIz/3AAq2HWjtD6j /f/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gINeEcxMwHw344XAa3OjTU2nu755npBSi0ngIQoGOs/iHeQf3Hq 8XEhl6hMAYnnytyM815FII7G+DFkoHigcU1DIsPN4z0D X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eqE1Npjvuoemt+w7XY0DDeVvLehtvJ6kDEicyV0ij6jR3egD+uHPtXM97yrVXw2ZD80zG2fHouUoAhquadoeI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a295:: with SMTP id i21-v6mr4152842ejz.86.1541082002930; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 07:20:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181031043810.GA10775@minnie.tuhs.org> <20181101074231.GA4844@vagabond> In-Reply-To: From: ron minnich Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 07:19:50 -0700 Message-ID: To: Clem Cole Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Unix APIs: elegant or not? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 7:05 AM Clem Cole wrote: > > P9 took a different path still (pun intended). as in: http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/4th_edition/papers/net/ It shows that you can use the pathname model for networks, And it shows one way to get it right. There are others. Here's a simple example of what get it right means: there are *no* commands on Plan 9 that end in 6. No ping6, for example. Plan 9 did not fall over sideways, as Unix did, when infiiniband introduced 20 octet addresses, which are the ip6 address and "more". Just look at how many sockaddr_* there are Linux nowadays, including those odd ones that have a name starting with a null byte. In Plan 9 there are 1, since a sockaddr in plan 9 is ... a string. That's not to say plan 9 got it perfect. it's just to say that one can use the Unix model of pathnames, open/read/write/close, for networks and IPC in general (even pipes). It's just a shame nobody's caught on yet ;-) And, to repeat, a bunch of us in the 80s tried to implement the idea of /dev/net/host/port (mind was in AmigaDOS), and it fails badly for all kinds of reasons. simple one: what's the implications of mv /dev/net/harv/20 /dev/net/prep/35 what happens? If only somebody could only find Rob's talk which delves into this in such nice detail ... In my view, what went wrong with Unix networking 40 years ago is that it broke from the Unix model, i.e. that resources are accessed via path names, and went with binary descriptors as paths. But what can you do? Synthetics were yet to be created. ron