On Fri Oct 15 17:14:18 EDT 2010, bumbudo...@gmail.com wrote: > 2010/10/15 erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net>: > >> isn't tag field for this intended? > > > > [...] > > > >> so this means to me that a client can send some T-messages and then > >> (or concurrently) wait the R-messages. > >> in inferno from mount(1) and styxmon(8) i deduced that this case is > >> also considered. > >> it's true that most of the servers i seen until now doesn't take > >> advantage of this feature, they respond to each T-message before > >> processing next message. > > > > there is no defined limit to the number of > > outstanding tags allowed. [...] > > so the real problem is not 9p itself than the transport protocol: TCP/IP.
the transport has nothing to do with it; > i think that a solution might be to run 9p over an information > dispersal based protocol, to eliminate roundtrips but guaranteeing > reliability. the definitiion of 9p relies on having round trips. - erik
