Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!spdcc!dyer
From: dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: NFS vs RFS (RFS ioctls)
Message-ID: <780@spdcc.COM>
Date: 5 Apr 88 13:23:38 GMT
References: <4456@chinet.UUCP> <1016@nusdhub.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Lines: 18

In article <1016@nusdhub.UUCP>, rwhite@nusdhub.UUCP (Robert C. White Jr.) writes:
> So, WHAT _IS_ the problem??  This is all in the standard you know, have
> YOU READ the standard??  [excuse me, aledged standard]
> 

ioctl() calls on remote devices cannot be easily handled since
the ioctl argument formed in user mode can be thought of as
"opaque" to the local kernel, having meaning only between the
user program and the server kernel.  There is no way that an
arbitrary client will be able to know the form of every ioctl
structure passed, since such objects are by definition arbitrarily
chosen by the server machine.  If the client and server memory
layouts don't agree, there will be trouble.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@harvard.harvard.edu
dyer@spdcc.COM aka {ihnp4,harvard,husc6,linus,ima,bbn,m2c}!spdcc!dyer