As I never heard of ACE and don't have the time atm to read the link, I can't answer those questions, but I can lay some info down on the Network Kit. 1. All in all, it is a OOP interface to networking. In fact, it's almost a front end for the POSIX socket interface, though without having to ever deal with sockets directly. 2. It's buggy, that was one of the reasons BONE was being implemented by Be. The network kit api didn't always behave as one would expect and the POSIX sockets were limited by the implementation (no raw sockets, and only TCP and UDP packet types.) 3. The network kit api, if it wasn't so buggy, would in truth be an awesome interface. BEndPoint, BNetBuffer, etc.. all really well done. Howard and the gang in the networking department at Be were awesome, and their work into BONE was 10x as good. I've worked with the network kit and the posix sockets.. I perfer the ease of use of the network kit, but was forced to use the posix sockets due to the problems. -jtarbox ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Gabriele" <jandl@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 8:27 PM Subject: [openbeos] Networking Object Library > I'm just learning my way around the BeOS/OBOS networking > (and networking in general), so please, be gentle. :) > > 1. > How would you say the BeOS Network Kit compares to/with > the ACE (ADAPTIVE Communication Environment)? > http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE.html > http://www.riverace.com/ > > > 2. > In NetworkKit.h, there's a comment: > > /* > * Nettle forward declarations > * > * The Nettle networking object library is compiled into the netapi kit > * and used by these kit classes. [snip] > */ > > Is it a better question to ask, how does Nettle compare to/with > ACE? > > > 3. > The way I understand it, the BeOS currently has 2 networking API's > built into it: the Network Kit Class Library and the Posix Sockets > library calls. How could ACE fit into this? Who might get implemented > in terms of whom? > > hmm.... I wonder: Could the Network Kit methods be currently > implemented in terms of the Sockets calls? > >