Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity First.

[Dzonatas Sol <[e-mail]>]

I'm interested in in implementation of the asset services, even 
completely fake, with mainly login like the simulators now. This is 
something just to give backbone to the current documents combined with 
implementations since then without any specific group behind the 
backbone. It doesn't have to support real simulator details, it could 
just forward proxy if it really want to turn into something. That's just 
the scrape for implementation sake. We need something like this, yet to 
justify it beyond people's agendas is... not productive.

I mainly wanted asset services unitized in order to support the 
multi-point/multi-client perspective, yet, like last year, I'm tired of 
being harassed by... agendas. We could always fallback to the proxy 
being on the viewer-side. *sigh*

On the documentation side, I think we could take the current proposed 
RFCs and simplify the type system into split documents instead one (that 
mainly reflects the monolithic design). That way we could come back 
later and easily update the more simplified versions. Just my 2 cents on 
the current state of them...

Izzy Alanis wrote:
> Along the lines of documentation... are we salvaging the last draft
> intro doc or scrapping it? If we're scrapping it, what about it didn't
> we like, what about it was good? The work on shoring up definitions is
> directly applicable to the intro doc, but the minute details of asset
> addressability and cacheability are leading us down a rat hole -- it's
> interesting conversation, but just not productive right now.
>
> Toward Carlo's mission of 'flexibility first': how would a statement
> about the flexibility of the protocol appear in such a document?
>
> - Izzy
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Dzonatas Sol <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   
>> We were and still are in discussion about VWRAP documents.
>>
>> As someone that implements, they don't want to read anything like "many
>> orders of magnitude" or "the best idea" or such exaggerated adjectives.
>> Don't expect your ideas ever to get implemented based on such language.
>>
>> Need just the facts, and the documents. Please, stop with how great you
>> think your idea is and produce the documents! Please include specific use of
>> the resources, LLIDL, DSD, etc.
>>
>> If this continues to be just discussion and neither documentation nor
>> implementation than I'm with the chair(s) to disband.
>>
>> Morgaine wrote:
>>     
>>> The asset fetch performance gain of a protocol in which asset identifiers
>>> make cross-world assets cacheable versus a protocol whose asset identifiers
>>> do not allow this is an extremely large factor of *many orders of magnitude*
>>> on all but the first occurrence of an asset.  For all intents and purposes,
>>> avoiding the need to fetch an asset over the network represents a gain of
>>> infinity, and this gain may be repeated many times over.
>>>
>>> I think it's pretty uncontestable that giving VWRAP an asset addressing
>>> scheme which is orders of magnitude more efficient than any other scheme
>>> that has yet been proposed would be an important benefit for the protocol,
>>> and highly likely to make it popular.  Conversely, if it lacks this benefit
>>> then another protocol will use it and will hugely out-perform VWRAP.
>>>
>>> We were talking about designing for the future.  Hash-based asset
>>> addressing is a case in point, and how we handle this proposal is apparently
>>> our first test case.
>>>
>>>
>>> Morgaine.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ===============================
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Dzonatas Sol <[e-mail]
>>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>    And... still local cache.. not vwrap.
>>>
>>>    I think it would be more wise to go with the implementations of
>>>    Google's and/or Siemens object identification to RFID codes. At
>>>    least we know this part won't exploit content.
>>>
>>>    It has further advantages than just that. I went into detail
>>>    awhile ago, yet with basic QM:
>>>
>>>  http://icyspherical.blogspot.com/2010/07/optimizing-simulations-with-basic.html
>>>
>>>    No, even given the possibilities presented, I don't think your
>>>    idea comes close to anything new in regards to the best. It's just
>>>    your preference.
>>>
>>>    Morgaine wrote:
>>>
>>>        On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Dzonatas Sol
>>>        <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> 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
>>>               <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>> 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
>>>                      <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>>                      <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>>> 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
>>>                             <[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>>                      <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>>
>>>                             <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>>                      <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>>>> 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
>>>                             [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>>                      <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                             https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>>                                                    --     ---
>>> https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
>>>                         Web Development, Software Engineering,
>>>        Virtual Reality,
>>>                      Consultant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>                      _______________________________________________
>>>                      vwrap mailing list
>>>                      [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>>
>>>                      https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>>
>>>                  --     --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
>>>                  Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality,
>>>               Consultant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>               _______________________________________________
>>>               vwrap mailing list
>>>               [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>>               https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>>
>>>
>>>           --     --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
>>>           Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality,
>>>        Consultant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>        _______________________________________________
>>>        vwrap mailing list
>>>        [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    --     --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
>>>    Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> vwrap mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>>
>>>       
>> --
>> --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
>> Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> vwrap mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>
>>     


-- 
--- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant