[sldev] Re: Plugin architecture

[Tim Shephard]

I hope Dale answers this thread, but I do recall that LSL -> Plugin
communication was important to him in order to enable his TrustNet
functionality.

I believe his logic was that he needed the TrustNet server requests to
come from SL in order to ensure that they were properly being
authenticated (owner key is sent in requests headers), otherwise he'd
have to set up a seperate authentication process.

Question for the Lindens:   is communication from the servers to the
client unreliable because of the udp transport?

Would you have to set up a seperate TCP channel (which I can imagine
would be quite a lot of work) in order to ensure reliable
communication between sims and client?

Even then I guess communication would have reliability issues as
compared to the current IPC via LSL llSay / lllisten..


On 2/23/07, Rob Lanphier <robla at lindenlab.com> wrote:
> On 2/23/07 10:21 PM, Jason Giglio wrote:
> > Tim Shephard wrote:
> >> I think some way to communicate from LSL to the Plugins would be very
> >> useful in many situations as well.
> > It goes beyond plugins, we need a way to communicate from LSL to other
> > built-in client enhancements we might develop too.  I'm working on an
> > idea for that. I'll put up a wiki page on it tomorrow.
> When you say "need", do you mean for the very first plugin interface?  I
> really hope you aren't expecting LSL modifications to be a prerequisite
> for the first version of plugins.
>
> I think the most successful model for creating the first plugin
> interface is to collaborate with Dale Glass on his extension, figuring
> out what is necessary for that.  Over time, we can evolve deeper and
> deeper hooks.  However, I think it's /very/ important to start simple.
>
> Rob
>
>
>