Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!visix!news From: amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Sockets, TLI, or what Keywords: Socket BSD TLI SystemV Message-ID: Date: 4 Dec 90 15:52:44 GMT References: <9389@ncar.ucar.edu> Sender: news@visix.com Reply-To: amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker) Distribution: na Organization: Visix Software Inc., Reston, VA Lines: 22 In article <9389@ncar.ucar.edu>, davis@groucho.ucar.edu (Glenn P. Davis) writes: > We are writing a system which will use process to process communication > with the processes perhaps residing on different hosts. > The emphasis is on portability. > > My first cut at this uses BSD 4.3 style TCP sockets. > My boss is wondering why I wasn't forward looking enough to use > didn't use "Transport Level Interface" from System V. If you're really concerned about portability, you are going to have to do both. My suggestion is to write a higher-level library that provides the functions you need, and hides the underlying mechanism. This way you don't end up with` socket (or TLI) dependencies sprinkled through your code. Which version you start with depends mainly on what machine(s) you are using for your initial development. I would, however, suggest that you read up on TLI before you start writing much code, just so you have enough background knowledge to avoid any major differences in capability (not that I remember any off hand). Amanda Walker Visix Software Inc. Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com