IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [vwrap] Status and future of the VWRAP working group

Izzy Alanis <izzyalanis@gmail.com> Fri, 25 March 2011 22:51 UTC

Return-Path: <izzyalanis@gmail.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 5771228C0FB for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:51:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 Qdke2cSFmj18 for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:51:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B778C28C0E3 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm15 with SMTP id 15so1635700fxm.31 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jqaEUI3B2p4aTszbVWC8z86PDJexnULkRF2H3lzbdNs=; b=H2MzTpzxkDAZU85QuBBrjUuzSSkxi/khg6rCBHiE9AVDnEfmLwHwNdvagSXnBjmuwl iHEMUWIdhlbKpQs1HlbIFDFcj+JpkXOQZddd+q4rQv1GEscT5w4Lkcr1lYGAd4cSju7o pvhzdFXX3ZI8vTZcA3/qMXUr5P9ol0Vds1wNk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=kOupRiD0Ldw1pPLyOmDVU1SwW7K7TODNx1QWAmGNbhP+wX0w5RJL5ahvWFn8LmcFOF BGxjWrogspXcQZrDumOCsV60ODLG7r6obDCPE9PJjy81NZbqFEkB2CNGcgq9XXlljC9n fbdignEt2BMgOy19LuVBD1xvGey29qdXNaOGM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.127.210 with SMTP id h18mr1516105fas.67.1301093569667; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.74.204 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4D8D182E.90101@gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=hAM-UowEcXBdtZ3y9KK_cQ5wUsWJKTv=rOXT_@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim0DFg1VXfegJ85cQSQuTZ66NmQULi7kf+pVwib@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTika90EbV8qFcwq43YSujfoarfLTtnnuM=EMPDUr@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimSnWb1g09+P++=ZTEgzkrir9RrNPUKNf2jOAr0@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik5SNwv9jEf1QBwOoji0GTYNRvPdiT=P2pDfJ44@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinLZNps6h=x16gCgexaJFXdAYPgBdaj4UGs73S0@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimhWbyQMKWTbtu-8ci1Q39igXSEYHFkb_Vyqx+N@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimQavrUESFHZkTA8hF1pOiU0v4szX-Q6ejEjef9@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=9rE5fEnT3GeAk6_+8u_USpO3KmaFqjVcL5LS1@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimSJa8b2_+=TvSE9R3+aPatgLhF0rM_P8Bh0SgL@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimJYsstf1_urmjpTBAx41O+-0=DoJk-sj4_JHRv@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik0zsd7Q=2LHO5gA_5FnFFiWjShQ=fCR4BuZrKq@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik=RxEOXbiq62bQpBSaejMoOiK6Fq=FPyU-0eKE@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim6xM_=aXVkEpYTc7-fJBx7eRW2gW-6nO0iL6gz@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=micS6bBm7WQJJwdG0ish=-r0p2v2K7oAjQCiB@mail.gmail.com> <4D8D182E.90101@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:52:49 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTim=tpngqs8gt=sjCeOQgtUATVRXXKe11qUaNJFw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Izzy Alanis <izzyalanis@gmail.com>
To: Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: vwrap@ietf.org, Meadhbh Hamrick <ohmeadhbh@gmail.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: [vwrap] Status and future of the VWRAP working group
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, 25 Mar 2011 22:51:16 -0000

No, not JSON.

If protobuf/protocol buffers were a formal standard, I would
unhesitatingly say protocol buffers. Since it's not a formal standard,
I say... protocol buffers. Just with hesitation.

To be fair, the binary serialization of LLSD + LLIDL isn't all that
different from protobuf (at least at some level). But it feels wrong
to rely on a serialization format made specifically for virtual
worlds.

We don't want to re-invent the transport level protocols, why do we
want to invent our own data serialization and interface definition
formats? LLSD implementations aren't going to be as thoroughly
reviewed, bug fixed, optimized, and readily available as an
actively-developed protocol-agnostic format like protobuf. Maybe there
was a good argument for LLSD when LL was still involved, but why now?
Other than historical reasons?



On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Dzonatas Sol <dzonatas@gmail.com> wrote:
> Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
>>
>> so what would you replace LLSD with?
>
>
> There is no reason to replace LLSD. If I did, it wouldn't be with JSON. It
> strange to see how JSON was suppose to be simple eval(), yet now how turned
> into the same direction SQL statements have with injection problems. JSON
> has become complex, and maybe now people see why XML is simpler.
>
> --
> --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
> Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email