On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Russ Cox <r...@swtch.com> wrote:
>> I don't use it from plan9ports. Not sure if Lucho is still using it
>> (or variants).
>>
>> But.... why does version negotiation muck things up? It seems like if
>> the other side isn't responding with .u then there shouldn't be any
>> issues.
>
> It just complicates everything, especially in a
> protocol multiplexer. You have to keep track
> of whether you're serving .u because it changes
> the layout of various messages and also the dir
> struct. I was happy to support the experiment but
> it sounds like the experiment has failed.
>
The complications with overloading existing operations is why we
started going with a new approach (.L). I just wanted to make sure I
understood the issues in the p9p version to make sure we aren't
repeating them.
-eric
