Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 113

Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com> Tue, 24 February 2009 01:52 UTC

Return-Path: <jwatte@gmail.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 6797E3A6895 for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:52:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.077, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 wfTRz6jlLTDx for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:52:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com (mail-gx0-f174.google.com [209.85.217.174]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873863A657C for <mmox@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:52:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gxk22 with SMTP id 22so6096490gxk.13 for <mmox@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:53:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rtggNbkNKyaWYtQ51ICfsjkOjgpt0bfyAm9DGx3zjv4=; b=p28jbptSSQFmHlSYM6IF6hHwGA3sbpp9Kmrvs9nSjkr0JHpL0l/nFIAZCDd5HLkP2G V6FbDVKdJRQMmXJoWzNn9UtLKTFP7ih75ZlKxyvYuzQvO0U5WQv8YhOc8RZu7EKTxYbC JhvENKC6+aHT7o2j90L+uEoXlhlYAET7Jlacg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=kNr03Y16AANj0R71Bsd+DOEtExAVMQfxygtaJ2gCYIdSNIIDcd5r+vpImUv1Ei/+++ KqGVC7p8835TwVPX9VPd32xK4rEStWsVepgTJK2EjRdbVNEbda5nGQTD63l6SZPy/I1V yrJYlYMcgQtZNPcNUwT7pWHLjKq+A3nZ9NO8I=
Received: by 10.100.125.12 with SMTP id x12mr5232172anc.4.1235440385017; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:53:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?192.168.168.111? (smtp.forterrainc.com [208.64.184.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b14sm9928820ana.36.2009.02.23.17.53.03 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:53:04 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <49A352FD.20908@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:53:01 -0800
From: Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dyerbrookme@juno.com" <dyerbrookme@juno.com>
References: <20090223.204109.9421.3@webmail20.vgs.untd.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090223.204109.9421.3@webmail20.vgs.untd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mmox@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 113
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, 24 Feb 2009 01:52:49 -0000

dyerbrookme@juno.com wrote:
> But all virtual worlds are a "representation of inventory". For example, the Second Life central asset server sends the information about an object stored in its data base to me on my server and I rez out the object.

That's not actually the proposal. The proposal is that the second life 
content repository sends your inventory to a second life sim for 
"rezzing." No non-second-life server would "rez" your object. I look 
forward to your interpretation of the actual proposal, as it's currently 
being discussed. I also recommend you search this list for threads on 
"DRM" because there is a proposal there, too, that might interest you -- 
again, comments on the suitability of that proposal encouraged.

Btw: nobody has told me what "rez" actually stands for, and why that 
word would be better to use than just "instantiate."

Sincerely,

jw