Subject: [ogpx] state/basic capability?

From: "Hurliman, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:13:15 -0700

Public region seed capabilities currently deployed on Linden Lab's vaak grid are handling out a capability called "state/basic" that I haven't seen documented anywhere. An example of the LLSD is here: https://sim1.vaak.lindenlab.com:12043/cap/c6227189-7258-2ec7-f48e-89de064c5d6c

The format is obviously specific to the deployed Linden Lab codebase (including parameters such as skip_mono_scripts and rccs_quarantine_release_hysteresis) and possibly acts as a replacement for the RegionHandshake UDP message, but the importance of this capability is unclear. Can it be ignored by clients? Do regions have to serve up that capability to get the Snowglobe 1.3 viewer working? Do we need to define a more generic version of this capability?

John

---

From: Suzy Deffeyes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:45:09 -0600

Snowglobe doesn't capture the 'state/basic' in the response .  Currently,
Snowglobe only looks at the 'authenticated', and 'agent_seed_cap', and in
the case where authenticated fails, it looks at the 'reason'.  The rest of
the content is ignored.

Suzy

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Hurliman, John <[email-masked]>wrote:

> Public region seed capabilities currently deployed on Linden Lab's vaak
> grid are handling out a capability called "state/basic" that I haven't seen
> documented anywhere. An example of the LLSD is here:
> https://sim1.vaak.lindenlab.com:12043/cap/c6227189-7258-2ec7-f48e-89de064c5d6c
>
> The format is obviously specific to the deployed Linden Lab codebase
> (including parameters such as skip_mono_scripts and
> rccs_quarantine_release_hysteresis) and possibly acts as a replacement for
> the RegionHandshake UDP message, but the importance of this capability is
> unclear. Can it be ignored by clients? Do regions have to serve up that
> capability to get the Snowglobe 1.3 viewer working? Do we need to define a
> more generic version of this capability?
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> ogpx mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>

---

From: Meadhbh Hamrick <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 06:52:32 -0800

and it's good to note that the protocol implemented by vaak /
snowglobe is NOT what's documented in the drafts, but a much earlier
(and incompatible) version of it.

-cheers
-meadhbh

---

From: Suzy Deffeyes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:54:23 -0600

One additional point. In the lovely little LLSD land that we have, it is
really easy to let extra goo go along with LLSD requests and responses.  If
endpoints start to rely on this extra goo, then effectively we have goo
seeping into what is being used into the protocol, without a mechanism for
defining it explicitly as an extension to the core standard, or without
being defined in the standard.

Suzy Deffeyes