linux-kernel - Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:29:55 +1030
From:	David Newall <david@...idnewall.com>
To:	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
CC:	Renzo Davoli <renzo@...unibo.it>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: New Address Family: Inter Process Networking (IPN)

Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Dec 06, 2007, at 00:30:16, Renzo Davoli wrote:
>> AF_IPN is different.  AF_IPN is the broadcast and peer-to-peer 
>> extension of AF_UNIX. It supports communication among *user* processes.
>
> Ok, you say it's different, but then you describe how IP unicast and 
> broadcast work.

Renzo also described something new (in the socket() arena): the 
multi-reader, multi-writer is just not available in IP.

I wonder if this solves the same problem as d-bus?


> So if you really think this is something that belongs in the kernel 
> you need to provide much more detailed descriptions and use-cases for 
> why it cannot be implemented in user-space or with small modifications 
> to existing UDP/TCP networking. 

I would strengthen this sentiment: If you think something belongs in the 
kernel, you need to argue your case (provide much more detailed 
descriptions and use-cases.)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/