Re: [ogpx] OGPX WG draft charter, 2009-08-19 revision

Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com> Thu, 20 August 2009 14:18 UTC

Return-Path: <carlo@alinoe.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 B36733A6EF6 for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 07:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.37
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.37 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745]
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 HLvaiVsWfWif for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 07:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from viefep12-int.chello.at (viefep12-int.chello.at [62.179.121.32]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886E73A6BAB for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 07:18:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from edge05.upc.biz ([192.168.13.212]) by viefep12-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.7.09.01.00 201-2219-108-20080618) with ESMTP id <20090820141752.QBJM6129.viefep12-int.chello.at@edge05.upc.biz>; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:17:52 +0200
Received: from mail9.alinoe.com ([77.250.43.12]) by edge05.upc.biz with edge id WeHq1c04m0FlQed05eHrGn; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:17:52 +0200
X-SourceIP: 77.250.43.12
Received: from carlo by mail9.alinoe.com with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <carlo@alinoe.com>) id 1Me8TL-0007se-Ce; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:18:35 +0200
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:18:35 +0200
From: Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
To: Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <20090820141835.GB28751@alinoe.com>
References: <f72742de0908191206m2a5b3e2fm4efcf0eaf471a758@mail.gmail.com> <3a880e2c0908191738x69235df3t4a42cdd5193ef5f7@mail.gmail.com> <e0b04bba0908191914h4837045ct777d2c63a30ddaf0@mail.gmail.com> <3a880e2c0908191925p506de284w5ebb5cab7d893256@mail.gmail.com> <e0b04bba0908192003p34a367f2q4b99be3cf916cd72@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e0b04bba0908192003p34a367f2q4b99be3cf916cd72@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: ogpx@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ogpx] OGPX WG draft charter, 2009-08-19 revision
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: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:18:07 -0000

I think that what Morgaine is trying to say is that
if Linden Lab's official (or hidden) policy is to NOT
interop with other virtual worlds, then they are not
the right party to trust when it comes to defining
a protocol that most, if not all, other parties DO
want to support interop.

Since it seems, at this point, that the policy of
LL will prohibit interop in the future between
SL and other grids, there is a lack of trust right now;
and as a result of that lack of trust, a very clear
statement about the intent of the OGPX (as opposed to LL)
about interop MUST be part of this draft.

Personally, I will reject any protocol that doesn't
make it a priority to concentrate on interoperability
(such as sharing LM's and teleporting). So, instead
of adding a paragraph that clearly states that the
objective of OGPX is to not support interop, I'd rather
see a paragraph added that clearly states that it
IS to support interop.

The keyword here being "clearly". That is certainly
not the case at the moment.

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>