Print

Print


Re: Truth in Advertising SiteManager SISO SiteManager <a href="/index.htm?LOGON=A3%3Dind9805%26L%3DZ-ARCHIVE-SIW-CFI%26E%3Dquoted-printable%26P%3D150051%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252Fhtml%3B%2520charset%3DUTF-8%26XSS%3D3%26header%3D1" target="_parent" >[log in to unmask]</a>
Sent From: [log in to unmask]


Which two RTIs are you talking about - The STOW RTI, the DMSO RTI, the Mak RTI, the Swedish RTI, the UK-RTI, or some other that I know nothing about? FWIW I think incompatable RTIs ARE a big deal - I know of one federation that had to pick the only RTI that supported all the platforms used by the federates, and it came close to excluding certain federates. On the other hand I accept that a 'wire standard' might severely restrict RTI writers from adding value to their products (eg hgh performance). There has been talk in the past of bridge federates, and a bridge API for RTIs; I seem to recall that the bridge API was necessary for some types of traffic - can anyone enlarge on this? If its not a red herring perhaps the study group could flesh out such an API? Nick Rule All opinions expressed are personal, and are not those of my employer. ---------- From: Jonathan Prescott To: SISO - Run-Time Infrastructure and Communications Forum Subject: Re: Truth in Advertising Date: 04 May 1998 18:04 Reply to: RE>>Truth in Advertising I think this discussion is veering away from what the original posting was about, namely, how do RTIs built by different folks using different methodologies, technologies, etc.. interoperate between themselves. The concerns about SOMs, FOMs, etc. are not really relevant. Currently, the goals of the HLA are satisfied as long as the same RTI software is used by all federate software within a given federation. Since only two RTIs exist/will exist in the near future, and, I imagine, as soon as RTI 2.0 has been accepted, only one soon after (the 1.x series will most likely be retired in favor of the 2.x commercial release), this may not be a problem until someone decides they need to build one for themselves. Still, the issue needs discussion, however, FOM and SOM don't play in the discussion. From the interface point-of-view, it won't make a difference, from a simulation/federate implementation it might depending on how difficult it is to maintain various versions of the code. ------------------- Jonathan Prescott [log in to unmask] ESC/XRPM - Modeling, Analysis, and Research Center (MASC) The MITRE Corporation Voice: (781) 377-3231 DSN: 478-3231 MS 1302FA Fax: (781) 377-7469 DSN: 478-7469 202 Burlington Rd Bedford, MA 01730



To unsubscribe from the Z-ARCHIVE-SIW-CFI list, click the following link:
https://discussions.sisostds.org/index.htm?SUBED1=Z-ARCHIVE-SIW-CFI