AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20080911230614.2a0bacb9@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<jonathan.goldick@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53DF@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:08:05 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Jonathan Goldick" <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: followup from yesterday's talk
Message-ID: <20080911230805.53ef33ae@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53DF@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53DF@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:02:45 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
<jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:

> Not sure if this email was also dropped
> 
> _____________________________________________
> From: Jonathan Goldick 
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 5:33 PM
> To: Andy Sharp
> Subject: followup from yesterday's talk
> 
> I was thinking about your idea on Linux on the txrx.  I still think it
> should come after the SSC work but in order to give it a fair
> assessment can you SWAG out what the high-level tasks and effort
> would be?  I'll be happy to work with you on that although I'm
> traveling shortly and pegged in preparation for the Sep board meeting.
> 
> A degrees of freedom that occurred to me is whether Linux does all of
> the txrx or just the networking layer.  If the performance could be
> managed we might be able to get IPv6 just by doing the networking
> cores and not bite the cifs/nfs bullet in the same pass.  Just a
> thought.

I got the email, but I still don't know how to respond to it.
I've been thinking about it off and on while thinking about GUI
and the system formerly known as Leopard.  There's just a whole lot of
different concepts floating about here, and I'm not sure if it's
possible to SWAG in a useful way at the moment.

The second paragraph is less clear to me. But I would respond to the
word IPv6 by saying that would be one of the secondary but important
goals of doing this: that other protocols could be plugged in front of
the file protocols; and also to make user-space able to access the
filesystem. Possibly through NFS. That would give us things like FTP
which I believe we desire. Even HTTP. Even.
