Back to SISO Website
SISO Discussion Forums

Help for SAC-PDG-WEBLVC Discussion Forum List


SAC-PDG-WEBLVC Discussion Forum List

SAC-PDG-WEBLVC Discussion Forum List


SAC-PDG-WEBLVC@DISCUSSIONS.SISOSTDS.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

SISO Discussions Home

SISO Discussions Home

SAC-PDG-WEBLVC Home

SAC-PDG-WEBLVC Home

SAC-PDG-WEBLVC  September 2018

SAC-PDG-WEBLVC September 2018

Subject:

Re: peer-to-peer WebLVC server connections discussion

From:

Keith Snively <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

SAC-PDG-WebLVC <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 20 Sep 2018 12:10:48 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (50 lines)

Brad,

I think this may not be terribly difficult for connecting WebLVC servers.

To support a single layer (as opposed to hierarchical network) of WebLVC 
servers, we would need to identify Peer connections as you point out.  
At a high level, we then need the following rules:

1) Applications connect to a single WebLVC server as a Child (standard) 
connections.
2) WebLVC servers connect to zero or more other WebLVC servers as a Peer 
connection.
3) Messages from Child connections are sent to all other Child and Peer 
connections.
4) Messages from Peer connections are sent to all Child connections, but 
NOT to Peer connections.
5) A WebLVC server manages Objects created on Child connections, but NOT 
on Peer connections.
6) A WebLVC server subscribes to messages on Peer connections by 
aggregating all Child connection subscriptions.

Of course there are details to work out, especially with #6, but this 
should be basically whats required to federate WebLVC servers.

Thanks,
Keith

On 09/20/2018 11:29 AM, Brad Dillman wrote:
> I'm not suggesting this for v1.0 of the spec., but I was thinking about Cloud-based Modelling and Simulation over on the CBMS discussions. And I think WebLVC could be of particular benefit as a proxy to an anonymous or uncertain cloud, where from the outside as a cloud client, you don't know what's inside the cloud or how it's built or if it uses DIS, HLA, TENA, DDS etc. or any and all combinations of those.
>
> The problem comes when connecting 2 clouds into a single simulation. That would imply connecting 2 or more WebLVC servers as peers, assuming each acted as a proxy to some implementation. I don't think we can currently do this as-is. And it hasn't been a priority for the v1.0 spec.
>
> But because I see solving the peer-to-peer WebLVC server connection problem has some value, I'm more interested to discuss it.
>
> The first 2 ideas I had were:
> a) during connection, identify the connection as peer-to-peer rather than client-server; then let the server interpret incoming messages differently for peer-to-peer connections.
> b) instead let peers connect normally, but use new message properties to indicate AttributeUpdates, ObjectDeleted and Interaction messages should be interpreted differently than they would be normally for clients.
>
> I think this is a complicated problem to solve, trying to decide if there are copies of objects on each server not, how multiple peers (say 3+) work, etc. Way too complicated for v1.0. But it might be a valuable contribution to CBMS.
>
> ########################################################################
>
> To unsubscribe from the SAC-PDG-WEBLVC list, click the following link:
> https://discussions.sisostds.org/index.htm?SUBED1=SAC-PDG-WEBLVC&A=1

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the SAC-PDG-WEBLVC list, click the following link:
https://discussions.sisostds.org/index.htm?SUBED1=SAC-PDG-WEBLVC&A=1

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search SISO Discussions

Search SISO Discussions


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Discussion Forum List

February 2019
September 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
January 2018
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
March 2017
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
November 2015
September 2015
June 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014

ATOM RSS1 RSS2