Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario
Mark Lentczner <markl@lindenlab.com> Tue, 17 March 2009 23:23 UTC
Return-Path: <markl@lindenlab.com>
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 C54CD3A69C4 for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.543
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.543 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 pgesojtdNXAi for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tammy.lindenlab.com (tammy.lindenlab.com [64.154.223.128]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092643A6860 for <mmox@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mv-guest-93.lindenlab.com (mv-guest-93.lindenlab.com [10.1.19.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tammy.lindenlab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73F951414001 for <mmox@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3B6FBE24-68BA-4E23-908F-E7ED0BB5B73B@lindenlab.com>
From: Mark Lentczner <markl@lindenlab.com>
To: MMOX-IETF <mmox@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <e0b04bba0903120735s5311a922ybbc40a30433166a3@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:24:38 -0700
References: <e0b04bba0903120735s5311a922ybbc40a30433166a3@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
Subject: Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario
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: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:23:55 -0000
> Do you seriously think it's a good idea to specify all the minutiae > of how a server and client interact, as a standard protocol? Yes. Telnet, FTP, IMAP & 2822, HTTP & HTML, XMPP, to name a few past examples. > Including how GUI is tied to local and remote capabilities, how a > scene graph is constructed and animated, how version patching is > done, how user control is forwarded, etc? Yes insofar as the semantics of the capabilities are defined, but not the precise UI. HTML & CSS specify quite a bit about the semantics of the presentation - and often dictate quite precise presentation. But browsers are pretty free to create GUI as they see fit. No to version patching. Updating the client is beyond the scope of the protocol. > And all that work, just to be able to show up in world B instead of > world A? Yes. > What about objects you want to use cross worlds; are you saying you > also want to specify the exact runtime requirements for objects > (scripting language, physics interface, etc)? Yes. 2822 & MIME, HTML & CSS & JavaScript, ODF to name a few past examples. > I believe that the real enabler of interop is to be able to merge > the simulations of different worlds Ah - here we disagree. I think this is a non-starter for the vast majority of users and use cases. Whereas I think users really care about using a single client, and a single virtual identity to roam the wide-open spaces of the metaverse. > So, if no users want to pay money for the convenience of not having > to install two separate clients, exactly why would any profit- > seeking company implement a second protocol in their client? Is it just a convenience that you don't have to download and run a different browser-like client applications for your bank, for Netflix, for Wikipedia, and for Google? I am old-enough to remember an Internet where each of those would have been independent protocols, with independent clients. While I as a user consider the single, universal web browser of great value - and would pay for it (I own a retail copy of Netscape Navigator!) - every other segment of the computer industry benefits so greatly by this architecture, that the browser has become free. Fundamentally - I think the scenario that Morgaine started this thread with points to an architecture that what many people want and satisfies many use cases. - Mark Mark Lentczner Sr. Systems Architect Technology Integration Linden Lab markl@lindenlab.com Zero Linden zero.linden@secondlife.com
- [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Rob Lanphier
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Ann Otoole
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Ann Otoole
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Mystical Demina
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Bill Humphries
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario David W Levine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Charles Krinke
- [mmox] My reading of draft-lentczner-ogp-base-00 Latha Serevi
- Re: [mmox] My reading of draft-lentczner-ogp-base… Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario eh2th-mmox
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Mystical Demina
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Ann Otoole
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario eh2th-mmox
- [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the Gener… Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Mystical Demina
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Kajikawa Jeremy
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Kajikawa Jeremy
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Frisby, Adam
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Mark Lentczner
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Jon Watte
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Morgaine
- Re: [mmox] 3-world OGP interop scenario Charles Krinke
- Re: [mmox] One more time: The LESS model vs the G… Christian Scholz