Andreas Raab wrote:
On 3/20/2010 4:43 PM, Michael Rueger wrote:
On 3/20/10 4:35 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:
So why does everyone ignore TeaTime? I admit I don't understand the
internals, but it obviously *looks* like it could be the basis of
Nebraska (or any other P2P solution).
Can you point me to a real good publication about it? I mean, a
*real* one?
AFAIK TeaTime never happened but they (Croquet/Cobalt) switched to some
multiplayer game like sync scheme (at least the poor me understood when
I saw the implementation ;-) ).
Actually we didn't. TeaTime (as conceived by David Reed) consisted of
two separate ideas, namely that of a world synchronization protocol
and that of a P2P network protocol. When David Smith and I implemented
the version we shipped in Hedgehog we dropped the P2P network protocol
part and only concentrated on the synchronization aspect which
resulted in *major* simplifications.
[...]
Coincidentally, I am toying regularly with the idea of using an even
more simplified version of TeaTime to do something like Nebraska.
Might get around to it one of these days, it's actually straightforward.
BTW, it's a misconception to think TeaTime is something complicated.
Complicated things don't work. Simple things do. TeaTime is actually
VERY simple. That's why it works.
I'm extremely interested in this kind of thing, since it helps hybridize
virtual worlds with hopefully beneficial results for all concerned.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap/current/msg00082.html
Lawson
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
