[Opensim-dev] Capabilities

[Melanie]

Well, for simple things like textures, that isnt relevant. We serve
any texture to any logged in client anyway. For other things of
course you're right. The texture case does give us a starting point
to develop the schema, then add security later.

Melanie

On 30/04/2011 17:28, Diva Canto wrote:
> Actually, there's one piece of new design/development that needs to be 
> done carefully. When capability services are served from servers other 
> than the simulator, we need a mechanism for the simulators to create the 
> paths dynamically in those servers and then revocate those paths. This 
> needs to be done securely. Thoughts welcome.
> 
> On 4/30/2011 7:44 AM, Diva Canto wrote:
>> I'm going to do this work on a branch called caps. This is mostly 
>> refactoring, not new development; it can go through a few iterations 
>> until we're all happy with the result.
>>
>> On 4/29/2011 3:01 PM, Diva Canto wrote:
>>> On 4/29/2011 2:37 PM, Melanie wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Caps as such are a a generic concept, they are not a Lindenism,
>>>> IMHO. Linden didn't invent them and I believe that the CAPS
>>>> mechanism as such should remain in the normal namespace.
>>>
>>> The idea is generic; our implementation is not; it's full of 
>>> LL-specific things, like LLSD, and it is serving the Linden clients 
>>> specifically. Other uses of capabilities will probably look quite 
>>> different.
>>>
>>>> Also, modules already use CAPS, if CAPS were in the client stack,
>>>> they would be much harder to access,, since the client stack is
>>>> somewhat isolated from modules.
>>> We can have modules in any dll. The proposal here is to move all 
>>> CAPs-related modules out of the core dlls, and have them in a Linden 
>>> dll, because they are designed to serve the Linden clients.
>>>
>>>> I believe that it should be possible to re-route caps to other
>>>> destinations, ROBUST or external servers, but not by moving all
>>>> handlers into the Servers namespace, that is not what it was meant
>>>> for. That would bloat and pollute it. This warrants more discussion.
>>>
>>> I agree. We can place them in some other Server.Handlers-like dll. 
>>> How about OpenSim.Server.Capabilities.dll?
>>>
>>> Crista
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> 
>