> in a word:
> no.

If I can ask you to expand a bit, is that "no" as in "no one has given
it any thought" or as in "anyone offering a STREAMS implementation would
be shot on sight"?

STREAMS is a pretty cool I/O architecture, but its chief advantage is
kind of minimized if you've already got a perfectly reasonable TCP/IP
stack (and if Van Jacobson's 100-instruction-tcp/ip changes manage to
work their way into NetBSD (they're supposed to be in 4.4BSD), there'd
be absolutely no excuse whatsoever for putting up with STREAMS' performance
woes).

STREAMS as a research toy could be quite interesting; STREAMS as a
networking philosophy would probably not adequately reward the immense
expense of doing them to specifications (remember, after the initial
STREAMS implementation (piece of cake), you've got billions and billions
of poorly-thought-out modules to implement: TLI, XTI, XTISO, EIEIO, ...).

About the only compelling advantage for a full STREAMS implementation
would be a desire to be able to call NetBSD "UNIX" by passing the
Spec 11,700,000 test if and when they finally finish it -- and I still
suspect that if it DOES finally come to pass, the charge for being tested
will be about as expensive as a USL source license...

Given that, leaving STREAMS as an exercise for the interested student
isn't unreasonable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------