Re: [SWMP] Kicking things off

On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 10:20 -0700, Alan Hudson wrote:

[snip]

> I found a power point slide here:
> 
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dtic.mil%2Fndia%2F2006test%2Fhudgins.pdf&ei=tV9cRuCMPJXmgQPQ2ISRBQ&usg=AFrqEzfxshHV-vgke_DVfAbBeaMw6xzg0Q&sig2=Zv-fDXeO5Lo0s8OxcOn45Q
> 
> Slide 34(TENA Solutions to Interoperability Challenges) talks about 
> On-the-wire specification and says this:
> 
> API Standard allows future technological advances for data transmission
> to be much more cost-effectively incorporated
> 
> I had taken this to mean that TENA took the same approach as HLA.

Heh... I don't know that that prose *means* anything. ;-)

Keep in mind that TENA is a software product whereas HLA is a spec. TENA
makes no pretense to vendor-independence.

As I mentioned, TENA is built on top of CORBA. The DMSO RTI (an HLA
implementation) was built on CORBA, too. But it was implementing a
abstraction independent of CORBA (or much else); as such, the fact that
it was using CORBA under the hood was not terribly relevant.

Since TENA is a particular implementation that implements an abstraction
*in terms of* CORBA, you can go to the (generated) CORBA IDL files for
ground truth. Though in practice, I cannot imagine someone wanting to
*talk* to TENA apps via the TENA mechanisms without themselves *being* a
TENA app.

[I don't think this is particularly topical to the SWMP list. If you'd
like to know more about TENA, we should probably continue this
off-list.]

-- 
Braden McDaniel                           e-mail: <braden@endoframe.com>
<http://endoframe.com>                    Jabber: <braden@jabber.org>

_______________________________________________
SWMP mailing list
SWMP@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/swmp