On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 9:21 AM, ron minnich<rminn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think your first, best bet is to try to find out what the Plan 9
> community needs, rather than adding on something that might not be the
> that important. I have not heard anyone express a need for zeroconf in
> Plan 9, but maybe I'm missing something.
>
He was mining the GSoC idea archives -- and I had expressed a desire
for zeroconf -- I'd really like to get rid of /lib/ndb/local as much
as such a thing would be possible. We also need it for Blue Gene and
Cloud environments since IP addresses are subject to change and need
discovery. The zeroconf support itself is actually kind of trivial --
its coming up with a reasonable synthetic file system interface (for
discovery as well as publishing) which would be the real contribution.
-eric
