Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site oblio.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!hplabs!oblio!monte From: monte@oblio.UUCP (Monte Pickard) Newsgroups: net.lan Subject: Re: Transparent Remote File Access Systems: Short Summary Message-ID: <257@oblio.UUCP> Date: Sat, 9-Feb-85 01:30:38 EST Article-I.D.: oblio.257 Posted: Sat Feb 9 01:30:38 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Feb-85 03:41:00 EST Organization: Counterpoint Computers Lines: 56 Thanx for posting the results to your search for 'Transparent Remote File Access Systems'. I am somewhat surprised at all the entries in your search. When we first demo'd the Plexus NOS entry at UNICOM in San Diego in 1983, there were no others that provided remote transparent access. Just two years later, I am somewhat sceptical that all those on your list provide 'transparent' access to remote file systems. I would like to offer the following minimum definition for qualifying as a 'transparent' remote file access system: * all files are accessed with 'path-names' that have the same syntax for local files and remote files. (this does not mean location-independence, just same syntax) * all applications running, that allow access to the file system through path-name parameters (i.e normal Unix applications (cmd's) like cp, ls, cc, etc.) must be able to run, without modification, on files that are local or remote, with inter-system operablility. (syntax is not good enough, functionality for file and directories, at least, must be provided in the Unix case. A path element must be a valid 'local' Unix object, transparently) This is only a minimum, I would like to see more stringent OS interface standards for local/remote file access (especially in Unix), but this seems to me to be a minimum for the 'transparent' case. I am not knocking the non-transparent case. Getting the job done, is getting the job done, anyway! Functionality, regardless of how cumbersome, is better than not being able to do it (as many systems can not). Also, this should be true for all 'transparent' file system interfaces, be it Unix to Unix, Unix to PC/MS-DOS, MS-DOS to MS-DOS, or X-OS to Y-OS. The Worknet, Sun, LOCUS, Newcastle, and Plexus sytems do this from my standpoint. It is arguable which does the best job at transparency. I do not know if the others you listed do. I am looking forward to your/others summaries of each systems functionality from the transparent aspects of local vs. remote file system access. When a standard does emerge, it is our duty to have influenced it for the overall good of the networking industry in general, not just for the benifit of few (i.e each individual start-up or big company). To me, inter-operability of the various emerging operating system 'standards', is essencial in the development of the computer industry as a whole. Monte Pickard Counterpoint Computers ..!ucbvax!hplabs!oblio!monte