Bob La Quey wrote:
NixOS and NetKernel are all I see out there (other than
virtualization) that appear to me to be significant steps
forward.
NixOS seems like the right thing. I'm not convinced they're going about
it the right way, but they will probably lead they way for someone else
to get it right.
NetKernel, I think, is probably not a significant advance in distributed
whatever.
I have a real concrete test for whether something "distributed
programming advance X" works.
Does it punch holes through NATs?
That simple concrete problem tells me everything I need to know.
Hole punching either requires *really* good abstractions, or it requires
the ability for the low and high level portions of your framework to
interact cleanly.
It also requires the ability to think about differences in latency and
bandwidth as well as how to deal with node failure.
Everybody who does "real" distributed stuff (Skype, Microsoft, Sony,
Nintendo, Blizzard) always seem to manage to punch holes through NAT's.
The poseurs (BitTorrent, aMule/eMule/eDonkey, JXTA, etc.) never seem
to be able to pull that off.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
