IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [vwrap] Why are we standardizing the login handshake? (was RE: one question)

Crista Lopes <lopes@ics.uci.edu> Fri, 24 September 2010 22:06 UTC

Return-Path: <lopes@ics.uci.edu>
X-Original-To: vwrap@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vwrap@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5FE63A6A58 for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.422
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.422 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.177, 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 VaC-iBRfL5SX for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from david-tennant-v0.ics.uci.edu (david-tennant-v0.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.174]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7666F3A69AE for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [169.234.6.38] (paul-mcgann.ics.uci.edu [128.195.1.146]) (authenticated bits=0) by david-tennant-v0.ics.uci.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8OM6hXS024931 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:06:43 -0700
Message-ID: <4C9D20F5.2020507@ics.uci.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:06:45 -0700
From: Crista Lopes <lopes@ics.uci.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vwrap@ietf.org
References: <62BFE5680C037E4DA0B0A08946C0933D012AD7E06A@rrsmsx506.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <62BFE5680C037E4DA0B0A08946C0933D012AD7E06A@rrsmsx506.amr.corp.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ICS-MailScanner-Information: Please send mail to helpdesk@ics.uci.edu or more information
X-ICS-MailScanner-ID: o8OM6hXS024931
X-ICS-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-ICS-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.363, required 5, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44, TW_VW 0.08)
X-ICS-MailScanner-From: lopes@ics.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [vwrap] Why are we standardizing the login handshake? (was RE: one question)
X-BeenThere: vwrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual World Region Agent Protocol - IETF working group <vwrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap>
List-Post: <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 22:06:19 -0000

John,

You may also want to read the intro draft.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-vwrap-intro-00

This is in 4.4:

"VWRAP defines formats  for describing objects and avatar shapes, but 
more importantly it
    describes the mechanism by which those digital asset descriptions are
    transferred between client applications, agent domains and region
    domains."
...
"Accessing and manipulating digital assets is  performed via 
capabilities which expose the state of the asset to an authorized client. "

In other words, assets are fetched by the client. So if my world pushes 
them to the client, it's not VWRAP-compliant.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email