Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!husc6!bu-cs!m2c!applix!mark
From: mark@applix.UUCP (Mark Fox)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans,comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Streams TCP/IP
Message-ID: <561@applix.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-Jul-87 17:25:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: applix.561
Posted: Thu Jul 23 17:25:05 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Jul-87 08:57:11 EDT
References: <725@hjuxa.UUCP> <649@houxa.UUCP> <278@unixprt.UUCP>
Reply-To: mark@applix.UUCP (Mark Fox)
Organization: APPLiX Inc., Westboro MA
Lines: 49
Keywords: TCP/IP, Streams
Summary: how so?
Xref: mnetor comp.dcom.lans:682 comp.protocols.tcp-ip:681

In article <278@unixprt.UUCP> monkey@unixprt.UUCP (Monkey Face@unixprt) writes:
>In article <649@houxa.UUCP>, mel1@houxa.UUCP (M.HAAS) writes:
>> Would someone please post a summary of reasons why use of Streams is
>> an advantage...  is there  a reason Streams is better?  than sockets?... 
>> Does the end user see any advantage?...
>
>The primary advantage, for those using ATT based UNIX, is that this is the
>only 'real' facility provided in UNIX System V to support networking.

Possible, but have you seen HP's or CPC's implementation of sockets in their
System V ports? Looks plenty "real" to me and cleanly done as well.

>It is not necessarily 'better', but it is a more appropriately structure
>for the varying protocols than other implementations (such as the
>4.x BSD architecture).

What do you mean by "a more appropriate[ly] structure"?  Could you back this up
or is this only an opinion?

>Hopefully the 'end-user' doesn't get involved
>at this level.

But with 4.x all the end-user needs to know is a host name in order to use
the Berkeley "r" utilities assuming NFS across remote mount points is not being
used instead.

>ATT's Transport Interface is mostly base on the ISO
>transport interface, therefore should map to the emerging interface 
>standards.

But its easy enough to add new socket types as Sun has for its
OSI protocol implementation.

>I have found that performance is not considerably 
>different in s STREAMS based vs. 4.x BSD based implemetnation of TCP/IP.

So?

>Monkey Face - uni-xperts

What're those?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not a socket bigot - but I have never seen an
implementation of streams and I am still curious why some people prefer them.

-- 
                                    Mark Fox
       Applix Inc., 112 Turnpike Road, Westboro, MA 01581, (617) 870-0300
                    uucp:  seismo!harvard!m2c!applix!mark