I know i'm pretty much a newcomer to this scene, but i'd like to throw my two pence into the midst.
First of all, i'm not a big fan of beaurocracatic discussions about the theory behind "what a grid is"; principally because we're not building a grid, we're building a platform - a platform which may have reaches far different from any scopes and concepts which we individually may retain. One thing which really provoked a reaction from me in Melanie's response was this: "being forced to share asset and inventory servers" Is that really such a bad thing? I have to be honest, I have not met a single person in second life, OSgrid, reactiongrid, openlife, k-grid, who has said to me "You know what, what we really need is asset segregation and to make content harder to find." Here's my viewpoint, in a summary. - Security is a good thing. Real security, as in, stuff which prevents attacks, helps to keep the grid stable, etc. - Please let's not provide a platform which promotes segregation. If you're really looking for the definition of a "grid", i believe there is a definite conflict of interest with this approach. - Let's look to the future, and not base the way we think on constructs already in place. No matter committed you think we are to the "linden designed protocol" - things can change in a matter of days. - I can easily predict the availability in the future of "asset farms" which are linked in to multiple grids. I think this is the right approach, please don't push things in the other direction. ~T Melanie wrote: > I believe that, for technical purposes, a "grid" should indeed be > seen as a trust domain. That was what the protocol was designed for > and bending it to anything else would be very painful and not > entirely successful, feature-wise. The Linden-designed protocol > elements are best suited to that situation, and the HG ones are best > suited to untrusted connections. > OSGrid really does straddle the fence in many respects, but I think > it will change over time and become HG connected rather than > grid-structured. The server-centric region handoff system doesn't > allow for any level of content protection and being forced to share > asset and inventory servers is no longer needed in the new > architecture that Diva and I hashed out last night. > We would, indeed, arrive at a secure Hypergrid, and a true 3d > internet, much sooner if we made that distinction and considered a > "grid" as we know it today a trust domain. > > From that follows: > Region = Webpage > Grid = Website > Hypergrid = Internet > > The operator of a complex, multipage website needs trust between > it's pages, and so the operator of a complex HG site with many > regions needs trust between them. > > Melanie > > > Diva Canto wrote: > >> As I zoom in on issues of trust and security, I'm getting to the point >> where I need a sharp definition of "grid". What is a grid, besides being >> a map/lookup service and a user accounts service? >> >> a) nothing more than that >> b) a trust domain >> >> If we choose b) then we need to think about OSGrid-like grids. How can >> we trust that a collection of regions administered by different people >> will behave? Can OSGrid-like grids survive without ToS being signed >> between the grid operator and the region operators? What if the ToS is >> such that it delegates to the region admins any liability on bad things >> happening in their regions? -- that leaves the user with no central >> authority to complain, which is as good as not having a trust domain. >> >> If OSGrid-like grids (i.e. no contracts, or very loose ones; just a map >> service) are to exist, then it's clear that b) doesn't hold in general. >> It means that there can be grids that are simply a collection of regions >> that come together in virtual space, but whose trustworthiness as a >> whole doesn't exist. >> >> The Hypergrid is specifically designed to cross trust boundaries. Should >> the OSGrid-like grids become HG-ed sims that share the same map, and let >> "grids" be, fully, trust domains? >> >> You may think I'm getting into philosophy, but this is critical for the >> technical work I'm doing right now related to authentication, >> server-side vs client-side authority, etc. If we can assume that a >> "grid" is a uniform trust domain with a central authority, things will >> be simpler in many ways. If not, things will be a bit more complicated. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
