- From: <touch@isi.edu>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 11:30:55 -0700
- To: touch@isi.edu, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, hallam@etna.ai.mit.edu
> From: hallam@Etna.ai.mit.edu > Resent-From: Andy Norman <ange@hplb.hpl.hp.com> > > >Granted, in-the-app is easier to deploy, but only because you're > >moving the kernel functions into the app, which can cause > >interferences later as kernel functions evolve. It also assumes > >that you're running only a single Web browser. > > I'm somewhat pessimistic about Kernel functions evolving. Looking > at my UNIX box on my desk I don't see it providing any more features > today than it used to. Granted, more of those features actually work > rather than merely claiming to. I don't see a cross platform scheme > for file locking thats credible and threads seem to have only > lukewarm support from the vendors. How about IP multicast? That's the sort of kernel-based function I was referring to. > To sumarise, I think we should forget about the travails of adding > protocols to a UNIX kernel, its the wrong mindset to be in. Forget about > designing systems for 1970s technology, the O/S scene has moved on, > wellcome to the 1980s :-) I wasn't speaking of Unix only. Patches or new stacks for any kernel would be the win here. Joe - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Touch - touch@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/~touch/ ISI / Project Leader, ATOMIC-2, LSAM http://www.isi.edu/atomic2/ USC / Research Assistant Prof. http://www.isi.edu/lsam/ ------- End of Forwarded Message ----- End Included Message ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Touch - touch@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/~touch/ ISI / Project Leader, ATOMIC-2, LSAM http://www.isi.edu/atomic2/ USC / Research Assistant Prof. http://www.isi.edu/lsam/
Received on Friday, 14 June 1996 11:34:22 UTC