You should read Section 8 of the Unix User's Manual

And see the importance of open and accessible operations

Systems Approach If, like me, you were a computer-science graduate student who cut your teeth on Berkeley Unix – complete with the first open-source implementation of TCP/IP – you know Section 8 as the cryptic System Maintenance Commands section of the Unix User's Manual.

It was obvious, to me, that this concluding section warranted a closer look because the introduction warned: "Information in this section is not of great interest to most users." Judging by my taste in research problems over the years, reading Section 8 turned out to be a pretty good investment.

But before getting to Section 8, you first learned about the rest of Unix, where you discovered how empowering it is to be able to build new internet applications. Anyone interested in how targeted investments in open-source software, coupled with affordable hardware, can spur innovation should study the role of the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) in the success of the internet.

It's easy to assume the internet as we know it today was inevitable, but at the time BSD Unix happened it was not at all clear that the incumbent telcos could be disrupted. We've commented on the power of APIs many times, but the impact of the Socket API (Section 2) on enabling innovation on top of the internet cannot be overstated. With that stable fixed point in the architecture, a thousand flowers bloomed… and we have, thankfully, moved well beyond the telco vision of B-ISDN.

Section 8 was the second half of the story. In addition to describing how to shutdown and boot a system, it defined the process for managing long-running daemon processes, the Unix equivalent of today's microservices. If you had responsibility for configuring and managing system services on your department's server, which came with superuser privilege, you needed not only to know how to program Unix, you also needed to understand the ins and outs of operating Unix.

As a grad student, the lessons I learned while being responsible for sendmail(8) on a live multi-user system were immeasurable. Every mistake instantly sent the faculty into the hallway looking for the responsible idiot. (In my defense, this was at a time when email addresses contained % and ! operators in addition to @, and their precedence was not well-defined.)

The lessons I learned while being responsible for sendmail on a live multi-user system were immeasurable. Every mistake instantly sent the faculty into the hallway looking for the responsible idiot

BSD also provided me with an early lesson in the power of having many eyeballs on the lookout for security vulnerabilities. Looking at the source code for sendmail, for example, revealed a backdoor, whereby one could Telnet to port 25, type the magic "wizard" command, and fork a root shell. So I made my counterparts at Berkeley and other universities aware of that vulnerability by doing exactly that.

Others probably did too, but it was a different time, and the lesson didn't initially take hold. With debugging convenience and a naive sense of community trumping security, the backdoor remained open by default in sendmail until the Morris Worm used it as one of its attack vectors a couple years later.

Gaining this sort of practical experience is obviously valuable if your plan is to become a system administrator, but it has long been my experience that an opportunity to manage systems that deliver services to actual users is a great source of systems research problems, as well as fertile ground for platform innovations.

My PhD dissertation, born out of frustration with sendmail, turned out to be on naming and addressing; later, real-world experience running a CDN on PlanetLab generated a sequence of systems papers (as Vivek Pai and I reported in a 2007 CACM article); and most recently, our experience operating an edge cloud has led to an appreciation for the state management problem inherent in DevOps. And my experience is far from unique: many of the cloud tools we take for granted today – Kubernetes is a great example – started as someone's response to an operational point of pain.

This all leads me to believe that an open operations platform (as documented in Section 8) is just as important as an open programming platform (as documented in Section 2) for democratizing innovation.

Would BSD Unix have had the same impact in the 1980s and 1990s if the university computer center had supported it rather than the computer-science department letting its grad students take ownership of the operations problem? We can ask a similar question today. The value of being able to create new cloud applications is abundantly clear, but is there also value in having open access to the tools used to manage and operate the cloud (rather than delegating the latter to the cloud providers)?

To me, the answer is clearly yes. It comes down to the virtuous cycle of solutions being enabled by platforms on the one hand, and platforms being reshaped with the experience of usage on the other. Stable platforms with well-defined APIs surely allow a thousand flowers to bloom, but eventually disruptive refactoring of those platforms is what leads to the next round of innovation.

Stable platforms with well-defined APIs allow a thousand flowers to bloom, but eventually, disruptive refactoring of those platforms is what leads to the next round of innovation

Software-defined networking is a famous example of disruptive refactoring, but it only works if we have sufficiently sophisticated tooling to assemble all the components into a coherent – and manageable – system. Orchestration and lifecycle management have become the dominant operational issues because (a) many smaller parts have to be assembled, and (b) these individual parts are expected to change more frequently. They are essential parts of what we might call the Cloud OS.

Certainly not everyone who writes programs – whether it's running on a personal server or in the cloud – also needs to know how to keep that program running 24/7, but from the perspective of empowering more people to participate in the creation of new systems, the operations platform needs to be kept open and accessible to anyone who wants to invest the time in it.

Fortunately, there are a plethora of open-source components available today that can be used to operate and lifecycle-manage a cloud. We've documented a roadmap for using them in Edge Cloud Operations: A Systems Approach (a sort of "Section 8" for the Cloud). We're hoping there are still a few people who are just crazy enough to give it a try. ®

Larry Peterson and Bruce Davie are the authors of Computer Networks: A Systems Approach and the related Systems Approach series of books. All their content is open source and available on GitHub. You can find them on Twitter, their writings on Substack, and past The Register columns here.

Narrower topics

Other stories you might like

  • Experts: AI should be recognized as inventors in patent law
    Plus: Police release deepfake of murdered teen in cold case, and more

    In-brief Governments around the world should pass intellectual property laws that grant rights to AI systems, two academics at the University of New South Wales in Australia argued.

    Alexandra George, and Toby Walsh, professors of law and AI, respectively, believe failing to recognize machines as inventors could have long-lasting impacts on economies and societies. 

    "If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge," they wrote in a comment article published in Nature. "Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions."

    Continue reading
  • Declassified and released: More secret files on US govt's emergency doomsday powers
    Nuke incoming? Quick break out the plans for rationing, censorship, property seizures, and more

    More papers describing the orders and messages the US President can issue in the event of apocalyptic crises, such as a devastating nuclear attack, have been declassified and released for all to see.

    These government files are part of a larger collection of records that discuss the nature, reach, and use of secret Presidential Emergency Action Documents: these are executive orders, announcements, and statements to Congress that are all ready to sign and send out as soon as a doomsday scenario occurs. PEADs are supposed to give America's commander-in-chief immediate extraordinary powers to overcome extraordinary events.

    PEADs have never been declassified or revealed before. They remain hush-hush, and their exact details are not publicly known.

    Continue reading
  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022