Re: [ogpx] Proposal: Change OGPX to...

okay.. i'll actually not recommend "antaŭ" as a replacement.

but yeah, saying "OVER over HTTP" or "OVER over XMPP" might be a
little confusing. and honestly, i like both OVER and ABOVE. i could
live with either.

maybe we could have ABOVE be both the group name and the protocol?

-cheers
-meadhbh

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM, David W Levine<dwl@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Comment below
>
> ogpx-bounces@ietf.org wrote on 08/21/2009 01:26:40 PM:
>
>> Joshua Bell <josh@lindenlab.com>
>> Sent by: ogpx-bounces@ietf.org
>>
>> 08/21/2009 01:26 PM
>>
>> To
>>
>> ogpx@ietf.org
>>
>> cc
>>
>> Subject
>>
>> [ogpx] Proposal: Change OGPX to...
>>
>> Hey gang,
>>
>> One of the charter issues we identified coming out of Stockholm was
>> the name (for both the group and protocol suite). Open Grid Protocol
>> (OGP)" is historical, used to describe interop trials from 2008, and
>> the name was carried forward to the BoF/mailing list (with an "X" for
>> good measure). Linden Lab employees, OpenSim developers and Second
>> Life residents frequently use the term "grid" to describe the
>> collection of systems responsible for providing virtual world
>> services, even if that set of systems would more accurately be
>> described by the terms "cluster" or "cloud" (or term-of-the-week...),
>> playing off the grid-like organization of regions on a map.
>>
>> We received repeated feedback that "grid" was confusing, both on the
>> list and at Stockholm, in the broader context of the IETF. This was
>> underscored by at least one person who attended the OGPX BoF in
>> Stockholm saying they anticipated hearing a discussion about grid and
>> cloud computing services.
>>
>> A few alternatives to OGP have been offered, such as "Region Access
>> Protocol (RAP)" and "Agent / Region Interaction Protocol (ARIP)". The
>> former discounts the importance of the agent oriented aspects of the
>> protocol, the latter discounts the "access" aspect of the protocol
>> which underscores the RESTful nature of the conceptual objects on
>> either end of a protocol transaction.
>>
>> From off-list discussions, here are some new suggestions:
>>
>> * "Agent Based Open Virtual Environments (ABOVE)" - (as a group name?)
>> * "Open Virtual Entity and Region (OVER)" - (as a protocol name?)
>>
>> These have the advantage of being concise, fairly accurate,
>> pronounceable, keeping "Virtual" in the name, slightly "cute" but not
>> overly so. They are not humorous or ironic and don't reference
>> pop-culture. They don't overload "IP" (yay) and avoid "P" in the name
>> (the dreaded "ATM machine" syndrome.)
>>
>> Taking these as serious suggestions, could we get rough consensus on
>> either/both of these? Last call for objections/alternatives?
>
> Above seems quite good. Over.. OVER.. well... I am dreading having to type:
>
> "When we run OVER over XMPP"
>
> I have shades of the movie Airplane. "Re: [ABOVE] Running OVER over HTTP
> under CentOs"
>
> That said,  quite like Above, and could live with Over. Frankly at this
> point, I can
> live with almost any name, as long as it doesn't requires a special keyboard
> to type it.
>
>
> - David / Zha
>
>
>>
>> (To maintain continuity of discussion, we should keep the OGPX mailing
>> list and other trappings until an actual working group is chartered.)
> +1
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ogpx mailing list
>> ogpx@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>
> _______________________________________________
> ogpx mailing list
> ogpx@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>
>