Dear Charles,
That is where i did like your XMPP approach.
I guess the rex-chaps can tell a bit more about their experience, they have
been playing around with telepathy framework.
My thought was:
- diving functionality into security groups (collaboration) and distribution
groups (communication)
- doing security groups "SL style" to enable as much user as possible the
migration SL --> open source
While still having the ability to e.g. introduce "super groups" (group in
group) for new viewer.
- doing distribution groups with jabber etc...
Means new viewer (maybe realxtend) whil have this ability build in - but
everyone could use a stand alone
Client. Event without a viewer, like IRC. Use it on travel/at work.
Pass the firewall via http wrapping.
I thought this would be a nice step towards future, while still keeping the
sl-viewer user aboard for a while (let say, next 6 month are important)
So: 100% agreed targets with moving on... I am a strong 3D web enthusiast
Cheers,
Ralf
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Charles Krinke <c...@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai
Austin)
To: opensim-users@lists.berlios.de
Message-ID: <543825.29055...@web82603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dear Ralf:
Yes, I have similar joy and angst at each of these discussions and
decisions.
I think the value we can bring on this mailing list is to express some ideas
in a helpful way as you have done. By doing this, we can influence the
thoughts in a positive direction of those, like Adam, and others, who are
implementing group stuff right now.
Having some legacy connection to our hated (and beloved) SecondLife is
important.
But, ... of equal importance, is figuring out how to move off into the
future with some changes that will be of more long term benefit as we get
closer to the 3D internet.
Charles
________________________________
From: Ralf Haifisch <r...@ralf-haifisch.biz>
To: opensim-users@lists.berlios.de
Sent: Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:12:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai Austin)
+1
It is very important to use a intelligent open framework AND NOT any
Approach that needs fixed ports etc. like the stone old voice in SL.
I did discuss that with lindens and lost the only realy interested company
while the hype time (3D is only a 0,1% of my Rl job atm) because the
implemented
technology was not acceptable from a firewall/routing perspective. It is
nice
for single user or organization with not governance needs.
So it must by (from transport) something that is a holepuncher, similar to
skype.
Using https-tunnel e.g.
Maybe it would be a nice chance to do the security groups "SL style", so one
with a SL viewer could build/interact inworld.
But if we use Jabber/XXMP for the communication part, a SL client would only
be limited In group communication - BUT could still use a second software
able to talk that protocol.
Wouldn?t brake compatibility where it hurts.
Cheers,
Ralf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 10:32:00 +0100
From: Ai Austin <ai.ai.aus...@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion
To: opensim-users@lists.berlios.de
Message-ID: <49d72910.0567f10a.0f80.7...@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Charles Krinke <c...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>... I suppose we could go in the IRC or XMPP/Jabber direction,
I would really encourage a Jabber/XMPP approach for group (and indeed
individual) which open up all sorts of opportunities to link to
external messengers, buddy systems with geo-location (think of the
9opportuinities for in world visualisation of collaborative and
distributed teams), intelligent communications things too. Ai
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
