System XVI: A replacement for systemd

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by catern on Sunday September 13, 2015 @08:23PM (#10213213)

>TI-RPC/SunRPC plays a big role here. It's much leaner than D-Bus and at least nominally capable of network transparency

Isn't that true of D-Bus as well? I mean, maybe it's just semantics, but if you're going to use the word "nominally" (read as "it claims to be") when saying it's network transparent, D-Bus is certainly "nominally" network-transparent as that's an advertised feature of it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by vezzy-fnord on Sunday September 13, 2015 @08:34PM (#10213227)

Network transparency is most certainly not an advertised feature of D-Bus. There has been some experimentation, but nothing concrete has ever come out of it. Nor does anyone really use it as a remote protocol.

In contrast, SunRPC is RPC, so network transparency is a given. The reason I said "nominally" is because in the case of SystemXVI, having proper distributed service management (not a goal at this point) would require more than that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by EmanueleAina on Tuesday September 15, 2015 @05:44PM (#10223383)

> having proper distributed service management

Which is more or less what CoreOS's `fleet` already does on top of systemd. They used a different protocol for remote communications (etcd, ie. HTTP+JSON) vs. local, which I guess can be a sensible choice as requirements are quite different.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by vezzy-fnord on Thursday September 17, 2015 @02:30PM (#10235212)

Yes, and they had to create an ad-hoc layer over systemd using a particular K-V store. Contrast to the more generic and seamless option of RPC interfaces, which are more versatile in making policy decisions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by catern on Sunday September 13, 2015 @09:57PM (#10213385)

http://dbus.freedesktop.org/doc/dbus-specification.html

Search for "TCP".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by wnoise on Monday September 14, 2015 @04:19AM (#10214073)

Note the complete lack of security.

(A shared secret sent in plain text is not security).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:System XVI: A replacement for systemd by EmanueleAina on Tuesday September 15, 2015 @05:39PM (#10223363)

I guess it's meant to go over TLS, just like HTTP basic auth.

[ Parent | on HN ]