[unios] Re: Networked GUI (was Posix and Networks)

[Anders Petersson]

From: Anders Petersson <anders.petersson@mbox320.swipnet.se>

>From: Pieter Dumon <Pieter.Dumon@rug.ac.be>
>
>> 
>> From: Anders Petersson <anders.petersson@mbox320.swipnet.se>
>> 
>> At 22:01 1998-12-15 , you wrote:
>> >From: Pat Wendorf <beholder@ican.net>
>> >
>> >1) Remote Dumb (graphical) Terminal Access
>> 
>> I'd want a remote access that does not differ from local access.
>
>I want both explicit terminal access. (Oh yes, I do like Unix/X),
>and hidden remote access. 

Would it do, if you could explicitly log in remotely and then work as usual?

>> >2) Server side processing (goes with #1, but not always thought of when
using
>> >smart terminals)
>> 
>> Yes. Distributed computing should be possible to implement too (later on).
>> Some users need that.
>
>A disrtibuted system is something that has to be implemented from the
>start or not. You must change the whole idea of your system. Look at
>Amoeba. 

Oh no, not THAT distributed! :)
What about a pluggable sub-system, that distributed computations can be run
under? Everybody that runs the sub-system would take part in the
computation, with the priority of the sub-system on each machine. Really
neat if you ask me.

>> >3) User Profiles (not new, but very important)
>> 
>> Network-wide home directories... Log in anywhere and it'll look the same.
>
>This is distributed computing. I would like a system which can do both,
>but it's almost impossible to do that.

You don't need a completely distributed system to use this, I believe. I
don't have any specific idea of how this could be done, at this time. Let's
think about it.

>> >6) Machine Resource level security (more an OS thing, but I'd imagine
>> locking out
>> >a re-map of the supervisors terminal screen to stop external security
>> threats)
>> 
>> Security is very important when incorporating networking.
>
>                 *******************************
>GOD ! What are y ou talking about? Locking out the supervisor terminal?
>OF COURSE. Ever been a sysadm???? Do you know what it feels like being 
>root on a multi-server network??? Do you know what one would do to obtain
>this? Of course a supervisor terminal cannot be reached. It's the most 
>important thing in the whole system! Such as simple security is something
>that is VERY BASIC to implement. (At least on servers)
>Also,we really don't want to make the networking errors Unix made back in
>the seventies and NT does now again. NT doesn't even survive a 
>denial-of-service attack! You have to add third-party software. 
>                 ****************************** 

Hehe, NT really sucks. And no, let's not re-do old errors... let's find new
ones! ;-)

>> Oh yes. I see no need to use the same program (as long as the effect is
>> equal, the method dones't matter), but sharing data is very useful. Just
>> have all users open the same file in a special shared mode, and they are
>> notified when changes are made by others and what's changed (changes are
>> seen directly). This requires little effort from the application
programmer.
>
>I think it shared programs would be useful too.

I maybe think of this different from you. The binary program could always
be shared, but that's just so evident. What I mean is that as long as the
program can read the data and update when someone else makes changes, what
program you use doesn't matter.

>> An ordinary home user is not in possession of a network. In those cases,
>> these features are not loaded or even not installed at all. Flexibility...
>
>That's exactly why we need the flexibility. The normal user's don't need
>it, but the UniOS designers will, and sysadms on servers, powerusers and 
>developpers will.

Never say never... flexibility could come in handy even for ordinary
users... Imagine they just run a general system update, and all updates are
done... without rebooting and without interaction from the amazed lamer.
That's flexibility.

>> I have another suggestion. Redundance in networking, which allows one or
>> several nodes to fail without loss of the joint computation or information.
>> To how big degree this can be done by the OS I don't know, but it's
>> certainly useful. What if you could just declare some data to logically
>> exist on the network, and it's automatically mirrored on several nodes,
>> with accesses made to the nearest copy without any effort from the
>> application's side? 
>> binEng
>> 
>
>Hm. What you are referring to, is ont of the buzz-words of the last year,
> CLUSTERING. Unix can do it, MS just starts to get some in-the-field
>experience. It's really important for a corporate server-OS.

Yep. Should be done as something like a virtual device driver. Doesn't need
to be done from the very beginning.

>An OS that can run _really_ non-stop (off course on the best hardware),
>should be able to be implemented too. Although... Tandy and some others
>seem to be the only firms able to do this... So it is rather difficult, I
>think.   

No reboots? That is a good goal. The final test of stability.

binEng

------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at http://www.onelist.com and
select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UniOS Group
http://members.xoom.com/unios