Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity First.
Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com> Tue, 05 April 2011 22:22 UTC
Return-Path: <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
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 46DD028C0EE for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:22:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.177, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 FZoDBCa8CezS for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ACBF3A67F3 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so1972105qyk.10 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 15:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=bAhwzqNmdlvNYTSau3R5EE+/8Zn8AgTAfPn73cn9PUQ=; b=e8sbfgSSVNtA+BVRHTarEHzeXxbo7ffAyymb8u8/FxkoNIystFdbec/nH+4brMRvi/ IDkSEPk9qkXKC0VPOSFTUifZ1oeHtKH6hvizajU8iCJ8sqN2teGHXGv8D5l2h8cy0G0b jjFg6/M8kCxcXEFv9zz6cLkD6XDo3Z2Hwy5AE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=TDM+ysH/n853Vt+dXfJXLor1bMj4B8C8XFfGnpvSWHJP0f3dvKUPyxBOU/OsNmJjHi tsBcBzXIgyBJdeqjzzRnyR8QBvQk37Uv4SbYLz7u4cs3VfuEQ09QCSeZDUlEOVxG/1jP LDtQTjd+6111wmTlVH7YPwXvQUGetSKtx0Gi4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.78.22 with SMTP id i22mr225355qck.33.1302042253669; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 15:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.211.84 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4D9B937C.1040403@gmail.com>
References: <20110330011458.GB8908@alinoe.com> <4D931434.2030206@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4646639E08F58B42836FAC24C94624DD92FDE22F3F@GVW0433EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> <20110401161332.37ca0f9e@hikaru.localdomain> <AANLkTimcMbrJzXYTvs0cszn+rhH4ygEPvzvLwu94gr-4@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=hL5YTAW9_V7EA3C3fiknU0o_ARA@mail.gmail.com> <20110405152025.26ba8f77@hikaru.localdomain> <4D9B4586.9080004@gmail.com> <BANLkTi=hX1ne=hvFqPh_EwTV_Urryxbp_A@mail.gmail.com> <4D9B73D5.4000809@gmail.com> <BANLkTikO5qY+ZOJuMkBfMRT2Y3HjtPCLYw@mail.gmail.com> <4D9B8ADA.9000106@gmail.com> <BANLkTimgdU6mzu+Vz-yUU_33cm9VrdHR0w@mail.gmail.com> <4D9B937C.1040403@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 23:24:13 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTik+V6xfbrx07eQO-zNq9r1v03j6CQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
To: vwrap@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00235429d8f40338f404a03356b2"
Subject: Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity First.
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: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 22:22:35 -0000
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com> wrote: > > Your approach, besides exploitations, has the typical problem to assume > asset IDs are only needed and are hash-able. > Asset IDs are not hash-able, it is the asset data that is hashed. The asset identifier is the hash of the asset data using a defined hash digest algorithm. The asset identifier is not guessable unless you already have access to the asset. Morgaine. ============================= > >> >> ================== >> >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com<mailto: >> dzonatas@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Again Morgaine, your appeals alone don't support themselves, and >> your ridicule is unwelcome. If you can not honestly make any >> serious response, please move on and don't reply to my posts just >> to further ridicule. It's very RUDE. >> >> If you have any implementation of your hash-based idea or actual >> technical detailed documentation ready for implementation, then >> introduce it. Until then, it's stuck in your head, and sounds >> other's ideas just with your name on it. Plus security by >> obscurity makes it as moot point. >> >> Documentation... ? >> >> Remember people tried to take one temp variable away from the >> JPEG2000 int multiple/divide routine because the idea it looks >> good (on paper) with one less variable. Actual implementation >> reveals, with timed tests, it is slower when anybody takes away >> that one temp variable. >> >> Morgaine wrote: >> >> Unfortunately your response was devoid of technical content, >> Dzonatas. >> >> If you have something technical to say about hash-based >> addressing, I would love to hear it. >> >> I have detailed in some depth the many benefits of hash-based >> addressing in the article I linked, and subsequently. If >> other good schemes exist, we should of course analyze them for >> technical merit and compare their benefits against those of >> hash-based addressing. >> >> That's the engineering process for making VWRAP as good as it >> can be. >> >> >> Morgaine. >> >> >> >> >> ========================= >> >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Dzonatas Sol >> <dzonatas@gmail.com <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com> >> <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com>>> wrote: >> >> Morgaine, we mooted your hash-based idea. This does nothing to >> help implement asset services. The only significant point >> you made >> is some expression for optimization, not correct functionality, >> which is needed first >> >> As for your other two, we can summarize those with public >> resources and flow (forward/reverse). Any more specific network >> topology than that only makes it harder to address. The >> only thing >> to worry about is already custom resources that overlap >> with newer >> public resources. >> >> Morgaine wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Dzonatas Sol >> <dzonatas@gmail.com <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com> >> <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com> >> <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com <mailto:dzonatas@gmail.com>>>> wrote: >> >> >> Do you think we are ready to implement some asset >> services now, >> with/without complete documentation? >> >> What more do you think is needed? >> >> >> Two or three things seem to be needed: >> >> * Defining the asset addressing concept is an extremely >> important >> matter, almost certainly the most important matter >> of all, >> because that determines how robust and scalable our >> worlds will >> be.� I've already examined alternatives for that >> in some >> depth, >> and the design with the best engineering properties so >> far seems >> to be universal hash-based addressing.� I first >> described >> that >> approach on the list here --- >> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap/current/msg00463.html >> , and referred to it in various subsequent >> discussions. >> >> * Defining the data flows between regions, clients, >> and asset >> services and which parameters control the flows >> needs to >> be done >> before a test asset service can be implemented.� >> Without >> that, >> an asset service is just a network-accessible storage >> service, >> not an asset service in the VWRAP sense.� Network >> storage >> services exist already, so just implementing one >> of those >> would >> not advance VWRAP. >> >> * We need to examine how various deployment patterns >> will >> use the >> asset services, and how the /multiple/ asset >> services that >> interop introduces are handled.� I am working on this >> currently. >> >> >> None of the above is particularly hard.� I think it >> won't be >> long before we have a scheme worked out and are ready >> for some >> implementation work. >> >> >> Morgaine. >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> vwrap mailing list >> vwrap@ietf.org <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org> >> <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org>> >> >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap >> >> >> -- --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol --- >> Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, >> Consultant >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> vwrap mailing list >> vwrap@ietf.org <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap >> >> >> >> -- --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol --- >> Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> vwrap mailing list >> vwrap@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap >> >> > > > -- > --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol --- > Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant > >
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Boroondas Gupte
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dickson, Mike (ISS Software)
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity First. Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Mike Dickson
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Mike Dickson
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Mike Dickson
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Mike Dickson
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Boroondas Gupte
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Mike Dickson
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Izzy Alanis
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Izzy Alanis
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Carlo Wood
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Izzy Alanis
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Izzy Alanis
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Morgaine
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Dzonatas Sol
- Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity Fi… Izzy Alanis