[email protected] wrote: > Send Opensim-users mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Opensim-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Groups in Opensim (Dzonatas) > 2. Re: Groups in Opensim (Teravus Ovares) > 3. Re: Groups in Opensim (Dzonatas) > 4. Re: Opensim-users Digest, Vol 20, Issue 41 > ([email protected]) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 17:42:45 -0700 > From: Dzonatas <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups in Opensim > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-users/attachments/20090405/7f3c95af/attachment-0001.html > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 20:31:50 -0400 > From: Teravus Ovares <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups in Opensim > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Last I heard, libpurple's licence blows that choice out of the water. > Unless, of course, they went lgpl? But.. I doubt it. > > Best Regards > > Teravus > > On 4/5/09, Dzonatas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I highly suggest to look into libpurple to avoid reinventing any steps if >> group chat gets moved off the region server. It could be all client based. >> >> The only thing that probably would hold that back is complete anonymity >> since libpurple would only be as anonymous as the services it connects and >> uses. I don't think complete anonymity will be needed among friends, and >> among friends is where libpurple can help accelerate implementation. >> >> Don't take this as a suggestion to put aside what has been developed. >> >> Charles Krinke wrote: >> >> I think the issue is going to be one of "evolution" and "compatibility". >> Many would say we want SL client compatibility for as long as possible. >> Given that, I suspect we will need to use the SL client means and perhaps >> evolve a second means as time goes on. >> >> Charles >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Robert Klein <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:03:38 PM >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups in Opensim >> >> >> +1 Diva, I totally agree with getting these tools off the region server. >> >> -Robert >> >> >> I don't particularly care about the details of the group feature design, >> and, as with everything else, I don't think there's "one right thing". >> In fact, I think this is one of those features where variety and >> competition are the right approach. >> My only concern is the architecture. All social networking stuff (IM, >> friends, groups and others) should be completely removed from region >> servers. They don't belong there, it's just wrong. Move all that stuff >> to interactions between the client and those services directly. We >> already have way too much of it in region servers, which should be moved >> out, let's not have any more of that. This is where I think we should >> break from OpenSim out-of-the-box being an SL clone to it being >> something else that's much better. >> >> marcel verhagen wrote: >> >>> Yeah groups support is a pre. >>> >>> But we should learn from the groups mistake secondlife has made. >>> >>> Think it was a mistake they use the groups for object permissions AND >>> also for community targets. >>> >>> So I think there should be different group systems for different use. >>> >>> One groups system for comminity building with im, notices, polls, >>> roles and groups profiles. Without a max group limit. >>> >>> And one group system for the object permission with an groups >>> inventory in it. Withouth the community building things. These object >>> group system should have a max limit. >>> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Opensim-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://n2.nabble.com/Groups-in-Opensim-tp2582536p2590078.html >> Sent from the opensim-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >> ________________________________ >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-users > >> mailing >> list >> > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users > >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 18:25:25 -0700 > From: Dzonatas <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups in Opensim > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-users/attachments/20090405/355fcfda/attachment-0001.html > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 21:42:33 -0500 > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Opensim-users Digest, Vol 20, Issue 41 > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > [email protected] wrote: > >> Send Opensim-users mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Opensim-users digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai Austin) (Ralf Haifisch) >> 2. Re: Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai Austin) (Charles Krinke) >> 3. post from dev-mailing list: badumnasim (Ralf Haifisch) >> 4. Re: Groups in Opensim (Robert Klein) >> 5. Re: Groups in Opensim (Charles Krinke) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 13:28:02 +0200 >> From: "Ralf Haifisch" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai >> Austin) >> To: <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: <00bd01c9b5e1$9502fd80$bf08f8...@biz> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai >> Austin) >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> 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 <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >> >> Charles Krinke <[email protected]> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 10:04:55 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Charles Krinke <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai >> Austin) >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> As I recall, we do have an IRC module, but it has fallen out of interest in >> testing in recent months. Perhaps we need two strategies. >> >> The first might be to start testing the IRC module again and work on its >> problems.The issue with the IRC module has been that it decreases stability >> in the region and the region freezes. Also, some have a problem with the >> extremely long prefixes it generates. >> >> It may be that our IRC module actually works better then we perceive, but >> since no one is using it, we just dont know anymore. >> >> The second might be to use that module as a model for an XMPP module. >> >> Charles >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Ralf Haifisch <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2009 4:28:02 AM >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai Austin) >> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion (Ai >> Austin) >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> 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 <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups Implementation Discussion >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >> >> Charles Krinke <[email protected]> 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 >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-users/attachments/20090405/7af37adb/attachment-0001.html >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 19:11:36 +0200 >> From: "Ralf Haifisch" <[email protected]> >> Subject: [Opensim-users] post from dev-mailing list: badumnasim >> To: <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: <010e01c9b611$93d6ffd0$bb84ff...@biz> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Heho, >> >> Thanks Adam and Gustovo for first infos. >> >> I moved this from dev to users to collect the audience for testing, see >> later. >> >> >> This post should not address security issues - maby open another thread. I >> would suggest to wait until we have some more results and maybe spoken to >> the badumna people. :-) >> >> >> the link is http://www.badumna.com/badumna/badumnasim.html >> >> .Net 3.5 SP1 is needed. >> >> >> since it is a client load balancer - it use a proxy. >> >> All scenarios of proxyserver only make sense if several people are accessing >> the same target (think of suid , isa or any web proxy you maybe have @work). >> >> If we want to test drive it, we should do a test scenario with some people. >> >> >> Preparing the server holding opensim with network statistics , e.g. nagios. >> >> Have a region where no one else is around - but enough content. >> >> Run 1, native >> >> Run 2, with badumnasim >> >> Clear cache of all before each run. >> >> >> Looks interesting to me - so I would like to run a test at the next weekend >> if I get some people. (I will prepapre a server) >> >> If you are interested, download and install badumnasim and better email me >> directly since I am on business travel next days. Ralf (at) >> ralf-haifisch.biz >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Ralf >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 06:14:24 -0400 >> From: "Frisby, Adam" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] BadumnaSim >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Message-ID: >> <63fad4f222230a4ea79de9e8be66473518ff0...@winxbeus19.exchange.xchg> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> I'd say you probably need a better sample size. 36/37 packets isn't >> conclusive. Try 2000+. >> >> Adam >> >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gustavo Alberto >> Navarro Bilbao >> Sent: Saturday, 4 April 2009 2:51 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] BadumnaSim >> >> Perhaps a union with the Grider ?. I tested Badumna in our server with >> PingTester and really noticed the improvement >> >> >> withot Badumna >> >> Sent: 36 >> Received: 36 >> Lost: 0 >> Loss Rate: 0.00 % >> Min Time: 62 ms >> Max Time: 375 ms >> Avg Time: 113 ms >> Avg TTL: 117 >> >> With Badumna >> >> Sent: 37 >> Received: 37 >> Lost: 0 >> Loss Rate: 0.00 % >> Min Time: 59 ms >> Max Time: 298 ms >> Avg Time: 96 ms >> Avg TTL: 117 >> >> >> 2009/4/4 Frisby, Adam <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> I'd just like to do a quick 'look at this' on the forge - the guys who >> designed it asked me about how to promote the idea to OS users, and I >> suggested the forge. They have put the code up in the SVN here, so go take a >> look. >> >> >> >> Basically it's a client-centric P2P load balancer. >> >> >> >> Packets which are destined to multiple users get sent via a proxying P2P >> layer which then gets each client to replicate it to its peers, rather than >> relying on the central sim to do so. Their initial results look promising >> (about a 50% boost in capacity). Obviously there are some security concerns >> too, but I think it's a nifty thing worth taking a look at. >> >> >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 14:03:38 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Robert Klein <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-users] Groups in Opensim >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> >> +1 Diva, I totally agree with getting these tools off the region server. >> >> -Robert >> >> >> I don't particularly care about the details of the group feature design, >> and, as with everything else, I don't think there's "one right thing". >> In fact, I think this is one of those features where variety and >> competition are the right approach. >> My only concern is the architecture. All social networking stuff (IM, >> friends, groups and others) should be completely removed from region >> servers. They don't belong there, it's just wrong. Move all that stuff >> to interactions between the client and those services directly. We >> already have way too much of it in region servers, which should be moved >> out, let's not have any more of that. This is where I think we should >> break from OpenSim out-of-the-box being an SL clone to it being >> something else that's much better. >> >> marcel verhagen wrote: >> >> >>> Yeah groups support is a pre. >>> >>> But we should learn from the groups mistake secondlife has made. >>> >>> Think it was a mistake they use the groups for object permissions AND >>> also for community targets. >>> >>> So I think there should be different group systems for different use. >>> >>> One groups system for comminity building with im, notices, polls, >>> roles and groups profiles. Without a max group limit. >>> >>> And one group system for the object permission with an groups >>> inventory in it. Withouth the community building things. These object >>> group system should have a max limit. >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Opensim-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users >> >> >> >> >> > > Charles has alot to say, I agree with quite a bit of it, but as a person > with a degree and > 20 years experience on the web, I would have to say that all this mumbo > jumbo need be > put into something that is offered a solution. So far, my gosh the > issues and the uncoordinated > ideas, let's try to get something together here for crying out loud. It > took two years to even have > OpenSimulator clouds. > > Tracy Welles > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users > > > End of Opensim-users Digest, Vol 20, Issue 42 > ********************************************* > > oops, sorry, wrong list, that was for mmox.. lol..
Tracy Welles _______________________________________________ Opensim-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
