Re: n-hurd networking

[James Morrison]

--- Simon Law <sfllaw@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>       Wouldn't it be easier to have the Hurd running closest to the
> hardware, the one on boot, have full control of the network?  Any
> sub-Hurds could be running on a private internal network, and the
> primary Hurd could do NAT.
> 
>       Of course, this would require something like Netfilter to be
> ported.  *sigh*
> 
> Simon

 What if the 1st hurd that was booted on a machine crashes?  Should all the
sub-hurds (or n-hurds, short for neighbourhurd) know they are a sub-hurd so
they can take over the NAT?  I like the idea of booting two hurds on the same
machine and each of them having every thing of there own except the cpu(s).

 My only problem with this so far is that I couldn't talk, over ethernet, from
one hurd to another hurd on the same machine.


=====
James Morrison
   University of Waterloo
   Computer Science - Digital Hardware
   2A co-op
http://hurd.dyndns.org

Anyone referring to this as 'Open Source' shall be eaten by a GNU

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com