Re: [vwrap] what's wrong with starting small?

Let me amplify John's comment one little bit. It should be obviously
straight forward to
apply a tiny bit of "internet style content negotiation" sauce to things to
permit a client
and region to attempt to find the best match of protocol and either succeed
in a match
or gracefully generate a response that says "This is the best I can do" so
the client
knows it isn't going to connect.

- David
~ Zha

vwrap-bounces@ietf.org wrote on 09/22/2010 05:13:23 PM:

> From:
>
> "Hurliman, John" <john.hurliman@intel.com>
>
> To:
>
> "vwrap@ietf.org" <vwrap@ietf.org>
>
> Date:
>
> 09/22/2010 05:15 PM
>
> Subject:
>
> Re: [vwrap] what's wrong with starting small?
>
> Sent by:
>
> vwrap-bounces@ietf.org
>
> We're working on implementing HG 1.5 support in SimianGrid right now
> which introduces asset fetching across trust domains. Crista could
> describe the implementation details better.
>
> On a side note, I realize that only defining teleport is not very
> useful if you're try teleporting from Kevin's web-based virtual
> world to an OpenSim instance that use completely different state
> synchronization protocols. At best that would end with the web-based
> client completing the teleport, OpenSim waiting for a UDP connection
> to be established, and the client and server both timing out. But
> you *would* be able to teleport from an OpenSim world to another
> OpenSim-compatible world, and it lays the foundation to start
> talking about next steps if we want to go further.
>
> John
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vwrap-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:vwrap-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Morgaine
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 1:58 PM
> > To: lopes@ics.uci.edu
> > Cc: vwrap@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [vwrap] what's wrong with starting small?
> >
> > Thanks for the link, Crista!  John's email mentions:
> >
> >
> >
> > *   Identity/Authentication
> > *   Assets (possibly Inventory, maybe)
> > *   Teleport (both login and simulation to simulation)
> >
> >
> > Let's talk about Assets. :-)
> >
> > Beyond a small amount of discussion and agreement with Joshua last year
> > on basic requirements that would enable inter-world tourist use cases,
> > there has been virtually nothing discussed in VWRAP about this core
> > topic without which everything else is singularly uninteresting.
> >
> > About a year ago, I spoke to John about the need for replacing the
> > singleton inventory/asset service in Cable Beach with a more flexible
> > one to allow inter-VW tourism, and John said that his singleton was
> > just a temporary feature in his prototype and would be improved.  Has
> > there been any progress on that in the offspring of CB, ie. SimianGrid?
> >
> > Staying with "State of the Union" topics, if we're merging VWRAP and
> > OpenSimulator efforts, would you like to give us a description of asset
> > handing in the new HG1.5 and where you expect HG2.0 to be heading?
> > Asset handling on interop is exactly the kind of topic that we need to
> > have examined in depth before we can write initial drafts that have a
> > chance of being relevant. :-)
> >
> >
> > Morgaine.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =========================
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes
> > <lopes@ics.uci.edu> wrote:
> >
> >
> >    http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap/current/msg00318.html
> >    If you are talking about *this* email from John, we are on the
> > same page.
> >
> >
> >    Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
> >
> >
> >       so we have a recommendation from at least two implementers
> > (myself and
> >       john) that we focus on a small subset of an overall virtual
> > world
> >       problem domain.
> >
> >       it seems to me that diva/christina and morgaine are pushing
> > for a more
> >       expansive problem domain.
> >
> >       can i ask, what is the issue we have with starting small
> > and then
> >       growing the problem domain?
> >
> >       i think i remember an IETF "old hand" (it might have even
> > been barry)
> >       say that it's a LOT easier to go back to the IAB / IESG and
> > ask to add
> >       things to your charter than it is to remove them.
> >
> >       i'm also thinking that some of the tension in this group is
> > over the
> >       conflicting objectives between the "expansionist" block and
> > the
> >       "dimunitivist" block. but it also seems that we're not
> > horribly far
> >       off from each other in terms of wire protocol.
> >
> >       maybe a solution could be to draft two documents... one a
> > "long term"
> >       goal for virtual worlds that describes the "expansionist"
> > objectives
> >       and another that is a little more short term and describes
> > the
> >       "diminutivist" objective for a small subset of things
> > needed for the
> >       long term goals?
> >
> >       is the concern with this approach that any near term
> > service (service
> >       establishment, event queue, teleport, assets) would need to
> > know about
> >       the totality of the virtual world in order to be practical?
> >
> >       -cheers
> >       -meadhbh
> >       --
> >       meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
> >       @OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * OhMeadhbh@gmail.com
> >       _______________________________________________
> >       vwrap mailing list
> >       vwrap@ietf.org
> >       https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >    _______________________________________________
> >    vwrap mailing list
> >    vwrap@ietf.org
> >    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> vwrap@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap