Re: [mmox] OGP scalability concerns

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Hurliman, John <john.hurliman@intel.com>wrote:

A few days ago I posted an e-mail highlighting my concerns with the
> architecture of OGP. I'm not sure if there was an implicit agreement from
> the OGP authors or if the e-mail was lost in the flood. I'm reposting in a
> new thread because I want to make sure I have a proper understanding of the
> architecture.
>
>
John, I don't think that it indicates implicit agreement nor that your post
was lost in the flood.  It's more a reflection of the fact that we've not
had a single comment from OGP designers at all here since the BoF, on
*any*topic. :-)

I'm not sure where they've got to, but they're not engaging in technical
discussions with the list at this time.  You haven't missed any responses,
afaik. ;-)

Morgaine.

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Hurliman, John <john.hurliman@intel.com>wrote:

> A few days ago I posted an e-mail highlighting my concerns with the
> architecture of OGP. I'm not sure if there was an implicit agreement from
> the OGP authors or if the e-mail was lost in the flood. I'm reposting in a
> new thread because I want to make sure I have a proper understanding of the
> architecture.
>
>
> >*      Indirectly, it highlights that the Agent Domain model does not
> >have a solution to the problem of accessing worlds with which there is
> >no trust agreement.  People will want to enter arbitrary worlds, and
> >therefore that restriction is inadequate.
> >*      There will be millions of worlds in an Internet-scale metaverse,
> >which makes the concept of interop through trust agreements far too
> >narrow.  Trust loses its meaning entirely when scaled to millions,
> >becoming mere paperwork or "security theater".
>
> This is, in my opinion, the fundamental flaw in OGP. Explicit trust maps
> (whitelists) work great when IBM wants to define policy to connect to the
> Linden Lab grid, but has no meaning and no hope of scaling when you talk
> about defining trust for millions of simulation grids and millions (or at
> least thousands) of identity providers. This is the primary reason that
> Intel and many members of the OpenSimulator/OpenMetaverse community have not
> considered OGP as a strong proposal for virtual world interoperability. If
> this understanding is not accurate, it would be helpful if an OGP author
> could step in and clear up the confusion.
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> mmox mailing list
> mmox@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox
>