[Opensim-dev] Region Crossing State

[Frank Nichols]

Diva,

I am very interested in co-simulation solution. Personally, I am totally
not interested in any solution that results in a bump. I think the users
should not be away of the organization of regions/sims as that is a
technical implementation detail and not a function of the emersion I as a
grid operator am trying to implement. Hence, bumps are not desirable. If I
can achieve bumpless movement (walking and riding) anywhere within my grid
- that is the solution I am interested in. Speaking without knowing
anything about co-simulation, my first concern would be that the average
grid operator may find it more technical/complex to setup than simply
resizing a bunch of regions and laying "track" across them all. But, that
is probably not fair to co-simulation, I will google your co-simulation and
do some research - thank you very much.

Since you are reading this :) have you given any thought to vehicles being
able to do HG transfers?


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Diva Canto <diva at metaverseink.com> wrote:

>  I don't think security has been holding this up. Security is an issue in
> OSGrid, only, but there are ways of mitigating it. The major hold up is
> that it's not trivial to do the handover of these objects, and no one with
> enough technical skills to do it has had enough motivation to do it in
> core. I tend do to this kind of stuff (moving things around servers), but,
> as you can see below, I don't have any motivation to do it, because I
> believe that border crossings SL-style are an inferior solution to the
> problem of moving vehicles within large areas. Instead of following that
> solution, I invested my time in figuring out how to do co-simulation in
> order to avoid borders in the first place.
>
> This is my perspective on the issue. I can't speak for others.
>
>
> On 6/16/2014 9:45 AM, Frank Nichols wrote:
>
> Thank you - the comments are very interesting and while I was aware of the
> security concerns, I didn't realise that was a big part of the hold up. I
> assumed security issues would be the equivalent of walking across a border.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Diva Canto <diva at metaverseink.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  I'm sure vehicle border crossings are important for some situations.
>>
>> For me, they got a lot less important now that OpenSim supports
>> variable-sized regions. There are also alternatives (co-simulation) to
>> moving vehicles along very large areas that are able to avoid crossing
>> borders altogether, therefore avoiding the "bumps" on borders and the extra
>> load that moving vehicles and crossing borders entail. These 2 things
>> (varregions and co-simulation) don't exist in SL, but they're superior in
>> some respects, because they avoid crossing borders altogether; it's much
>> smoother, keeps the load down, and avoids running into security issues.
>>
>> Here's a video showing a large-scale traffic co-simulation:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=291yE_9eefU#t=4m02s
>> Co-simulation means that one simulator has part of the objects, in this
>> case the vehicles, and the other simulators have the rest of the scene
>> objects. The vehicles never cross borders, even though they move along very
>> large distances (in this case, 3km x 1.5km).
>> I talked about how to do this at OSCC'13.
>>
>> This is not to say that I don't support adding proper vehicle border
>> crossing support to OpenSim, if someone cares to do it. +1!
>> But I would never trade the borderless way of moving vehicles for the
>> SL's way of moving vehicles, so vehicle border crossings has been very
>> low priority for me, personally. One of the perks of reimplementing the
>> server-side is that we can do things that can't be done in SL!
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20140616/5618ece8/attachment.html>