On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Diva Canto <[email protected]> wrote: > > We have been using "interface version numbers" to refer to communications > between simulators and their central services *within* grids. We introduced > these numbers mainly because of OSGrid, where the central services are run > by one group of people and the simulators are run by others, and therefore > the software upgrades are not coordinated.
Diva, Thank you for your informative posts regarding HG versioning, interface version numbers, and OSGrid's proxy issues. Anyone who was unclear on those topics should be well informed now. To further clarify some of the earlier statements that Ai made, any reference to interface numbers in relation to the HG 1.5 protocol has been purely out of neccessity. IMHO, just as "interface version numbers" were introduced to help coordinate communications between simulators and their central services, the decentralized peer-2-peer network of the thousands of active HyperGrid nodes also need adequate version numbers in order to coordinate communications between each other. Even though the HG 1.5 protocol has not changed, the facts on the ground are that grids/standalones using Interface 6 cannot communicate with grids/standalones using Interface 7. No matter how many times someone is told that the HG 1.5 protocol has not changed, it does not change the fact that they cannot travel to the same destinations that they could before they upgraded to Interface 7. As you are aware, we manage a network of 300+ HyperGates. Every week we provide hundreds of HyperGrid addresses to HyperGrid travellers via those HyperGates and via our web site http://TheHyperGates.com . When HyperGate owners began updating to revisions that contained the newer Interface 7, it quickly became clear that all Interface 7 grids/standalones could only travel between each other and could no longer travel to destinations that had not updated yet. When this incompatibility became appearant, we were sure that even though the HG 1.5 protocol had not changed, a new revision or maintenance number was going to be announced in order to coordinate communications between compatible HyperGrid destinations. Something like an "HG 1.5.1" announcement would have made the situation instantly clear to many HyperGrid travellers and region owners alike. When this new HG revision/maintenance number announcement was never made, we were forced with either providing people incompatible HG 1.5 destinations or splitting our HG 1.5 HyperGate Network into 2 seperate networks and coming up with our own naming to differentiate between the two. Since the only difference between the two networks was the Interface number that they each used, we decided to label the two networks according to their Interface numbers: i.e. HG 1.5 i6 and HG 1.5 i7. We strongly support any decision to begin version numbering the HG protocol in an effort to better indicate compatibility. We are all fully aware the OpenSim is still in alpha and that HG still needs a lot of work, but the first time HG traveller doesn't care about version numbers and can't be bothered to hunt down the undocumented ins and outs of HyperGridding. To them, it either works or it is broken. And first impressions can mean a lot. Anything that can help region/grid owners build a more reliable mesh of HyperGrid destinations for their first time HG travellers, can only help the overall advancement of the HyperGrid. kidd _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
