Re: [vwrap] Consensus? What exactly should be in the protocol

[Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>]

um. since when is UDP a "web technology"?

also, the javascript server you have running in your browser, if
you're behind a NATted firewall, doesn't that require you to
manipulate your firewall to route a public port/address to your
browser?

--
meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
@OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * [e-mail]



On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 1:38 PM,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I also have a game server that uses TCP/UDP that runs from my server, to
> handle the object synchronization.  My point is I am using what all are
> considered web technologies.
>
> I was more making the point, why even say it is a web app or not.  As long
> the exposed behavior of my system supports the protocols and formats that
> are needed it can interact with other systems.
>
> And the URL is the web page that the world is hosted on.  And I had 300+
> avatars walking around in this web page.
>
> K.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Meadhbh Hamrick [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 4:26 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [vwrap] Consensus? What exactly should be in the protocol
>
> also. how many other people are connected to your javascript virtual
> region simulator running in your browser?
>
> what URL do you give them to connect to it?
>
> --
> meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
> @OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * [e-mail]
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Why is virtual world not a web app?  My virtual world runs in a browser
> and
>> can talk to my webserver.
>>
>> K.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
>> Meadhbh Hamrick
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 3:37 PM
>> To: [e-mail]
>> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [vwrap] Consensus? What exactly should be in the protocol
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Cristina Videira Lopes
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> Cristina Videira Lopes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You can dictate that. But then this will be completely irrelevant in a
>>>> couple of years when WebGL is actually usable or when Google finishes
>> their
>>>> virtual machine for running safe native code on browsers.
>>>
>>> ...or when server-side streaming goes mainstream, and being in a virtual
>>> world is as simple as running a video player plus a few JavaScript/native
>>> back channels to the server.
>>>
>>> First point is: according to the Web principles, each web application
>>> controls 100% what and how the client gets via this really powerful
>> concept
>>> of hypermedia. It is unlikely that the world is going to adopt a standard
>>> that forces implementers to take several steps back on this kind of
>>> autonomy. The diversity is what gives service providers an edge.
>>
>> hold on there! you just gave two completely opposing examples. if i
>> have a video player that's receiving raster lines from a distant game
>> server, that's TOTALLY the opposite of a client having complete
>> control over it's hypermedia input. if i simply started streaming an
>> OnLive session of someone doing SecondLife in a flash based video
>> player, there's absolutely no way to guarantee that the data used to
>> create the scene would be available to the client.
>>
>>> The second point is: when we have all that variety of viewer
>> implementations
>>> that are all equally accepted by the web browser, we are still to cope
>> with
>>> portability of user agent simulation state between those worlds -- and
>>> that's the bottom line for interoperability of virtual worlds on the Web.
>>> I'm interested in this, because it's much more foundational than the
>> variety
>>> of virtual world implementation options.
>>
>> also... the virtual world is not a web application.
>>
>> if you look at typical web apps, the mashing up is usually done at the
>> server side, turned into HTML and then sent to the browser.
>>
>> we're starting to see a lot more apps where JavaScript is used to do
>> mashups in the client, but...
>>
>> VWRAP was chartered to work on server-authoritative worlds (like
>> Second Life and OpenSim.) that means there's a lot of state in the
>> simulator. it sounds like you want to open this state up and push its
>> simulation to the edge of the network (and thus support
>> co-simulation.)
>>
>> did i read that right? did you really just say that virtual worlds are
>> client web apps?
>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> vwrap mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> vwrap mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>
>>
>
>