I don't have much of an opinion on how good this particular proposal is, but it is important to have a sensible IPC system for Linux. I see a lot of resistance

I don't have much of an opinion on how good this particular proposal is, but it is important to have a sensible IPC system for Linux. I see a lot of resistance to this, with claims that Unix sockets and POSIX are good enough. As the maintainer of Rust's ipc-channel, which wraps all this stuff, I strongly disagree. The complexity of the Linux implementation of ipc-channel [1] has been absurd compared to the Mac implementation, which uses Mach [2]. Don't let the similar lines-of-code count fool you—90% of the bugs that I've seen go by have been in the POSIX backend, necessitating things like manual fragmentation to get around size limits in the kernel, weird structure alignment rules in the cmsg API, file descriptor limits, ENOBUFS stuff, etc. etc. By contrast, the Mach implementation has more or less "just worked". At this point I don't really care what the Linux kernel decides on, as long as it decides on something. kdbus or Binder or anything would have been fine; the people who are truly hurt by kernel politics are us developers. [1]: https://github.com/servo/ipc-channel/blob/master/src/platform/unix/mod.rs https://github.com/servo/ipc-channel/blob/master/src/platfor... [2]: https://github.com/servo/ipc-channel/blob/master/src/platform/macos/mod.rs https://github.com/servo/ipc-channel/blob/master/src/platfor...