Re: [ogpx] ogpx focus?

David W Levine <dwl@us.ibm.com> Fri, 12 June 2009 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <dwl@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8615128C1D6; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Ns1MIOB4vQjv; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com (e5.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.145]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E3FD28C1B0; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e5.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5CGnQIv023883; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:49:26 -0400
Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.2) with ESMTP id n5CGtR2a246694; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:27 -0400
Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n5CGtRxG021417; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:27 -0400
Received: from d01ml605.pok.ibm.com (d01ml605.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.91]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n5CGtRi9021398; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:27 -0400
In-Reply-To: <558312.70763.qm@web82608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <3a880e2c0906111203x3b0629e0k36579da73ed60b17@mail.gmail.com> <4A323067.3020009@comlounge.net> <3a880e2c0906120854u3f327f0bma9936f26a6101813@mail.gmail.com> <558312.70763.qm@web82608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: Charles Krinke <cfk@pacbell.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: CEFDB2AB:605C9953-852575D3:0058F278; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.0.1 HF105 April 10, 2008
Message-ID: <OFCEFDB2AB.605C9953-ON852575D3.0058F278-852575D3.005CF725@us.ibm.com>
From: David W Levine <dwl@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:26 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01ML605/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5|December 05, 2008) at 06/12/2009 12:55:26, Serialize complete at 06/12/2009 12:55:26
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 005CF723852575D3_="
Cc: ogpx-bounces@ietf.org, ogpx@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ogpx] ogpx focus?
X-BeenThere: ogpx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual Worlds and the Open Grid Protocol <ogpx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ogpx>
List-Post: <mailto:ogpx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:55:27 -0000

The way I'd describe it is:

OGP  if fully articulated will define

1) A low level distributed computing approach  (Caps, LLSD, X.509, and 
event queue plumbing)
2) A bunch of virtual worlds building bocks (Prim formats,  Inventory, 
Assets, Region description, policy languages) 
3) A set of rules on how to manage services which share, and don't share 
trust (Domains)
4) A set of computational services delivered over 1 and 2 which can be 
used to build out collections of services described by 3
5) A specific structure of 4) which represents Linden Lab's best take on a 
useful way to partition the problem space. This defines regions, which 
live in region domains, and agent services which live in an agent domain. 

Nothing in OGP defines how people's policies between deployments will be 
set (nor should it, that's how you run your service) I expect there will 
be far more regions than agent domains, and I expect we will find
lots of regions that implement some combination of OGP and Hypergrid, or 
similar schemes. 

I would observes, that irrespective of using OGP, Hypergrid, or some other 
scheme, that it would be really quite nice if we could make sure that 1, 
2,  and 3 can be shared.  This would enhance the overall health of the 
ecosystem that is developing around these closely related technologies. 

- David
~ Zha



 



Charles Krinke <cfk@pacbell.net> 
Sent by: ogpx-bounces@ietf.org
06/12/2009 12:03 PM

To
ogpx@ietf.org
cc

Subject
[ogpx] ogpx focus?






I would like to see if we concur on a few points, if I may. And I am not 
trying to stir up controversy, but rather understand some of the feelings 
of where this will eventually go.

As I understand where ogp *might* go, it will be a protocol that will 
allow two seperate virtual worlds to eventually, as peers, both run a sete 
of master servers currently called domain servers, I believe.

In that case, each world will be able, as a peer, to negotiate via 
packets, the interop from worldA to worldB (or from worldB to worldA).

That is, we are not contemplating that there is only one domain server at 
SecondLife, but that, say, OSGrid could run its own domain server and have 
reciprocity?

Charles_______________________________________________
ogpx mailing list
ogpx@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx