7 Jun
2012
7 Jun
'12
10:52 p.m.
On 2012-06-07 19:40, Sampsa Laine wrote:
On 7 Jun 2012, at 18:12, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
The main difference I can see vs. having the implementation in the kernel is that the
kernel one gives you an integrated API. DecNET/Linux uses sockets, so an existing socket
based app can be made to run over DECnet with potentially very little work. On the other
hand, a userland implementation would need a different mechanism for the communication
between the application and the DECnet daemon.
Again it was suggested that the DECNET daemon listens on a socket, then you just plop the
destination and/or listening details in via that mechanism - it's one line or so of
code :)
But that is not enough. You need to read/write data, get notifications somehow, do out of
band transmissions, accept, reject, connect and get information, and some more stuff. You
need a protocol for talking to the daemon, no matter which way the communication actually
pass back and forth between user programs and the daemon.
Johnny