Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns
Christian Scholz <cs@comlounge.net> Mon, 06 April 2009 21:55 UTC
Return-Path: <cs@comlounge.net>
X-Original-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B8563A6866 for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 14:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.114
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.114 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_36=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6vPt-xPFOm2e for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 14:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from post.comlounge.net (post.comlounge.net [85.214.59.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E2643A6885 for <mmox@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 14:55:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by post.comlounge.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBBE1CE016F; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:56:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from post.comlounge.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (h1346004.stratoserver.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oq9CsbNi6MaD; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:56:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.2.101] (pC19EAFC7.dip.t-dialin.net [193.158.175.199]) by post.comlounge.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB5D21CE00EA; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:56:39 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <49DA7A95.4010303@comlounge.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 23:56:37 +0200
From: Christian Scholz <cs@comlounge.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com>
References: <62BFE5680C037E4DA0B0A08946C0933D7B692E1B@rrsmsx506.amr.corp.intel.com> <CD02023C-3E7B-4E76-8429-11035C827E53@lindenlab.com> <f0b9e3410904011701i2ccb03d4r1b48d33cfe3988ea@mail.gmail.com> <49D40A06.7030708@gmail.com> <8D793BD8-6AA2-49C7-96EF-435A5B449AA6@lindenlab.com> <49D4295C.2020502@gmail.com> <52A129B8-3FC6-486A-99A5-C00BED8BDE08@lindenlab.com> <49D4E5AF.2030301@gmail.com> <49D51A7D.8000104@comlounge.net> <62BFE5680C037E4DA0B0A08946C0933D7B6934A3@rrsmsx506.amr.corp.intel.com> <49D52DCD.2000806@comlounge.net> <49D531DA.4080006@gmail.com> <49D533EA.4010301@comlounge.net> <49D54648.4020007@gmail.com> <49D6284D.8050000@comlounge.net> <49D64660.4060900@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49D64660.4060900@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "mmox@ietf.org" <mmox@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns
X-BeenThere: mmox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Massively Multi-participant Online Games and Applications <mmox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmox>
List-Post: <mailto:mmox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:55:47 -0000
Jon Watte schrieb: > Christian Scholz wrote: >> So lets look at the spec as it is right now: >> http://tools.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hammer-oauth-02.txt >> >> And maybe we should use the same terminology because I might simply be >> confused ;-) >> > > That is a re-wording and clarification of the version I had previously > read. Right. > I guess the question then is whether service provider implementations > require the callback URL in their implementation, or whether they'll be > OK with a NULL callback URL. I know of at least one service provider > that has a form submission to obtain an application key where the > callback URL cannot be left empty, but maybe it can be redirected to > some URI that does nothing. Remember that OAuth is still fairly new and not all use cases or best practices have been researched fully yet. But now with Twitter also moving towards OAuth more people discover some potential problems such as that callback URL, e.g. iPhone applications. There is some workaround though which was discussed regarding those apps which is using a protocol handler, e.g. secondlife:oauth_success which could then be catched by that respective application in case of desktop or iPhone apps. You can of course also simply redirect to a dummy URI which simply instructs the user to click "Continue" on the original web page. > Regarding service discovery: Does anyone want to start talking about XRDS? > http://xrds-simple.net/core/1.0/ Of course, although it's probably replaced soon by the XRD spec (sneak peak and examples here: http://www.hueniverse.com/hueniverse/2009/03/xrd-weekly-recap.html So I guess we should name our little project simply "Service Discovery" and we need to find out what we actually want to do. The XRD spec for describing resources and the LRRD spec for discovering where to find the XRD document are already being written so our task might be to check if and how they are applicable to our problem space. So we might need some use cases and requirements and the output might eventually be some description of how to apply the XRD suite to our problem. I personally would be very much interested in what bigger parts a virtual world might actually consist of. Right now I guess it's a client and a server (or a cluster) in most cases, except Croquet which is only clients (is that right?). Now if we decompose things the question is how the actual workflow from starting the client to appearing in some simulator for other users might look like. And how moving from one simulator to another (usually called teleport, technically a login or handshake) might look like. -- Christian -- COM.lounge GmbH http://comlounge.net Hanbrucher Strasse 33, 52064 Aachen Amtsgericht Aachen HRB 15170 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Ben Scheffler, Christian Scholz email: info@comlounge.net fon: +49-241-4007300 fax: +49-241-97900850 personal email: cs@comlounge.net personal blog: http://mrtopf.de/blog personal podcasts: http://openweb-podcast.de, http://datawithoutborders.net
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Hurliman, John
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Lawson English
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jason Giglio
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Rob Lanphier
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Hurliman, John
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Hurliman, John
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Hurliman, John
- Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns Christian Scholz