Arnt Karlsen wrote:
Both of these networks don't seem to be really interested
in cross-platform development, so I really wonder whether
these new versions will mean that the protocol is also
going to change anytime soon...
..which lands us back to define our own. ;-)
I am going to ask them about that, but:
I have actually just a couple of minutes ago received a
reply from the VATSIM people: I may have been wrong ... or
at least my impression may not have been all that correct:
they seem to be rather positive about the idea and also
mention not to be "windows-fanatics" :-)
I just got in touch with the author of squawkbox(.ca),
as soon as I have talked to the others I would recommend
to set up some (private ?) talks - possibly using eMail ...
"Private" because they shouldn't feel forced to share
'internals' that they consider essential ...
..keep in mind, one of the reasons interoperation fails, is they keep
their protocols secret.
lol, but hey - I was asking very directly :-)
I can understand their worries, too: imagine if that's the
only way to keep your network kind of 'safe' - by simply
not telling anybody how it works ...
..also remember there are many game sims out there, say Warbird, and
some of these use secret protocols to have people pay for game access.
...the latter is for example something that VATSIMS EULA doesn't
(seem to) permit ...
..other people reverse engineer these protocols, setup "free"
servers but keep their source closed, such as wbfree.net .
Apart from possibly the game fun, it is not clear to me "what's
in it" for wbfree, it certainly is possiible to make use of such
closed source schemes as, say, spammer infrastructure.
..with a published "game server" protocol, we make these people either
adopt our open protocol, or risk scaring away their gamers business on,
say, "the uncertainty of closed source as spammer infrastructure." ;-)
while I expected some of the reactions so far, I was also admittedly
surprised to hear about some of the people involved being into
the "open source" thing - so maybe the odds aren't all that bad.
We will see, VATSIM didn't yet definitely say anything about
'closed source' protocol specs - so far this may seem like
2:1 for VATSIM ;-)
Flightgear-devel mailing list