Slashdot Mirror
Network Stack Cloning Updates on FreeBSD
Dan writes "Network stack cloning patches on FreeBSD allow for multiple fully independent network stacks to simultaneously coexist in a single FreeBSD kernel. Marko Zec has prepared a latest snapshot of the patches (against 4.8-RELEASE). The latest snapshot includes (a) internal restructuring - - struct vimage is now separated in resource-specific containers, and (b) Kernel message buffers - each vimage / vprocg now has a private kernel message buffer instance. Julian Elischer gave a talk on this subject at the USENIX Annual Technical Conference (FreeNIX track) in San Antonio, TX, June 2003. Marko's slides were presented at BSDCon Europe 2002 in Amsterdam."
1. You can not play games on it.
2. It cannot be used by my grandma.
3. It lacks a GUI of any note.
4. There is no support available for it.
5. It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.
6. It cannot be run on the x86 platform.
7. You have to compile everything and know C.
8. Support for the latest hardware is always poor.
9. It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.
10.It is dying.
Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dead
Like many of the new ideas in the BSDs (private namespaces as chroot for instance), the idea of separate networks stacks is taken from plan9.
It is even possible in plan9 to use the network stack of a remote machine as your own.
Using sshnet one can do "sshnet remote_host" then all subsequent network activity for the current process group and any children will use the remote hosts' network stack as though it were local.
In this way one can run tcp listeners on a remote machine (on IP N) that deny requests from anything but the IP N and leave SSH as the only external listener. No special tunnelling hoops to jump through.
Monolithic kernels are dying.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
What We Can Learn From BSD
By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents [theos.com] on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.
amen to that!
/net /net
one hasn't truly lived until they've done an:
import somewhere.far.away
I tried a different stack with my two test FreeBSD white boxes, both AMD duron 1300, 256sdram, 40gig 7200 hdd with a 10/100 surecom NIC and a crossover cable. I had a shared partition on one, but when I tried to copy a 17 meg file from one of the boxes to the next it took more than 20 minutes. Something is seriously wrong here dudes, 10/100 network from duron to duron with a 17 meg file and I am still waiting. I'm not even running X and my links browser is lagging up as I type this...
Trolling is an ancient artform, you my freind are a spammer. Learn the way of the troll and you can help others come to new realisations, elightening the world.
The troll is outcast, he is forever the outsider commited to the outside. When the reality changes, so does the troll. In this sense a troll is like water, changing his position as the rock moves. You have yet to change your nappies.
When someone is about to snap the troll pushes a little harder till he hears cracking, then stops. The victim of the trolling can then see the cracks, and has the spinal mobility to change form and evolve. If you push too hard you either make them snap or you make them dig into an immobile position to resist the trolling (which is the case when you spam them).
I appreciate what you are trying to do, but you are giving trolling a bad name.
what is the point? :( pdf is a little rough for a monday morning.
grow a dick
Just sent an email to the author to see if using this would allows jails full access to the TCP/IP stack
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
Hmm talking dirty whenever you *compose* a statement about BSD, doesn't do linux any good.
Besides that i have the feeling that was those
marketrolls (IBM, HP and the like) who enforced pressure on linux project between 2.2 and 2.4
and some "wrong" path was taken, and now
SCO has some pretty good cards to play.......
I'm telling you trollies....
You buyed a share....
It didnt pay off.....
Sell it you morons!!!
As a matter of fact, i think you will be the same exact
trolls that will be bitching about the rest of the *BSDs
or any other project on earth (including Linux if it will
ever make it again),
when FreeBSD becomes the standard modern Unix
Desktop and server platform.
I dont think your mental problems are strictly IT related anyway.....
this is great work, i appreciate it. I think its important to enjoy all forms of open source research.
I do, however, pity the children who squander their valued time in life on putting down the hard work of individuals who create such great things.
People like this, give whatever "community" they think they are a part of a childish image, when in reality the community wants nothing to do with any of them.
I would rather not make any insults back, but please...go home, give your mother or whom ever raised you a visit, and ask them to explain why you were fed so paint chips as a child.
Bones: It's dead, Jim.
His name is Kevin, he used to work for BSDI (or WindRiver) and he is a theif and a liar. He steals equipment from his job, and pathetically attempts to eBay it. I'm not going to tell you all his last name, but with enough work you'll be able to figure out who he is and spam the shit out of him.
To his former employers: Please go ahead and press charges against him, so he'll have to taste meaty man-cocks and get pounded in the ass until he bleeds daemons. ButtStingingDeath!
But didn't get the point.
What are some concrete uses of this technology?
TIA
BSD you grow in the ghetto, living second rate
And your eyes will sing a song of deep hate.
The places you play and where you stay
Looks like one great big alley way.
You'll admire all the numberbook takers,
Thugs, BSD pimps and pushers, and the big money makers.
that is the whole fucking point of the article.
fuck i hate *Bsd zealots.
switch to a viable os people
Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personas?
The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.
Yet another cunting bombshell hit the "community" of *BSD asswipes when IDC recently confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of one single puny fucking percent of all servers. Coming hot on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more fucking market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is ingesting itself backwards, disappearing up its very own shitter, as fittingly exemplified by coming a piss poor dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a cock-sucking Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any fucking future at all for *BSD because that sorded, shit-filled, mutated testicle of an operating system is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink splashes across the accounting documents like a series of exploding bloodfarts. FreeBSD munches the most ass of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD cuntwipes Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying and its rotting corpse smells worse than a maggot, vomit, shit and piss cocktail.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the fucking numbers, shall we? OK!
OpenBSD wanker Theo states that there are a pathetic 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Oh, God, let's fucking see... The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore it's turd-suckingly obvious that there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore, by simple fucking arithmetic, there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. Surprise fucking surprise, this is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of those arseholes at Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD showed themselves to be a bunch of retarded tossers, went out of business and were taken over by BSDI who sell another special needs OS. Now BSDI is also a miserable failure, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house... pathetic.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily fucking declined in market share. *BSD is where it belongs, at death's door and its long term survival prospects are almost non-fucking-existant. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among moronic, dilettante shitheads. *BSD continues to Chew Satan's Dick And Fuck The Baby Jesus Up The Pooper. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD IS A FUCKING USELESS WASTE OF BITS AND IS DYING LIKE THE DOG THAT IT IS. IT MAKES ME SICK JUST THINKING ABOUT IT.
IT MAKES ME SICK JUST THINKING ABOUT IT.
Then please nip off and shoot yourself, M'kay?
...does Microsoft steal this, and when will SCO claim to own it?
Your wish has been granted... actually it was around more than a decade ago.
Check out QNX, you can use other QNX machine's network (and other devices, including audio, graphics, block devices etc) as your own local ones!!! And no silly imports etc... they just work!
- mritunjai
We're talking about a different level of abstraction, here. After all, from the OS's perspective, how can Plan9 "use the network stack of a remote machine" except via the network stack of the local machine? Nothing short of magic will let a machine "use another machine's nic" except via packets sent through its own. Yes, Plan9 supports user namespaces that allows network interfaces to be virtualized, but that's from the perspective of what BSD calls "userland" -- which is only partly related to what the article discusses.
This facility is about allowing multiple networks stacks from the kernel's perspective. Not just the illusion of separate stacks as seen from userland (though it certainly provides that, too). These stacks can then be treated independently from the perspective of packet filtering, traffic shaping, and so on, as well as providing a "virtual machine" from a user's perspective. This isn't to say that Plan9's capabilities aren't useful or interesting, especially from a theoretical perspective. But Plan9 has different goals than an OS like FreeBSD that first and foremost is designed to be used as on server in a datacenter. Thus the perspective is more along the lines of machine virtualization and really has little to do with Plan9's concept of a namespace.
In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Emacs Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various BSD machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a FreeBSD box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the BSD machine's faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 800 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that BSD is a "superior" machine.
FreeBSD addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a FreeBSD over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
Plan 9 had it 14 years ago. Importing something and using it as your own is a consequence of its design -- everything is a file, so everything could be shared -- not a special hack like in QNX. That means I can let people import my mailbox so they can send mail to me on the 9grid or I can import somebody's IRC file system on my machine.
And it really means _everything_, not only devices. Check out this MPI implementation using remotely served and imported _pipes_:
message passing for Plan 9