[sldev] UUID variant/version bits?

[Zha Ewry]

Well, in theory.. UUIDs are supposed to be Universal, not domain specific.
The bit space is supposed to be big enough... If it isn't, then we'll need
to migrate to a bigger one. Zero made the argument on Tuesday, that it *is*
big enough. If the bits which are supposed to be used to mark UUID type are
enough to push the UUID space too small, then.. we need a bigger bit space.

- Zha


On Nov 29, 2007 1:25 AM, Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net> wrote:

> Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> > On 28-Nov-2007, at 16:41, Lawson English wrote:
> >> Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> >>> On 28-Nov-2007, at 13:59, Lawson English wrote:
> >>>> The issue MAY be an issue once the meta-grid goes operational.
> >>>> You'll have to make sure everyone is using your version of UUIDs or
> >>>> asset-collisions might arise when moving from grid to grid.
> >>>
> >
> >>> Unless someone has changed things recently, I believe that the
> >>> intent is for externally-visible assets to be presented as URIs, not
> >>> UUIDs.
> >
> >> Unless I misunderstand, the CAP for a given asset will be roughly of
> >> the form: server_URL:port/cap/asset/UUID.
> >>
> >> Where UUID is the current asset UUID
> >
> > (note, I'm using 'domain' in the generic sense of a set of systems and
> > resources with a single responsible control)
> >
> > The mapping from the internal UUID to an external URL will have to be
> > handled on a per-domain basis. Asset references between domains will
> > need to be handled by passing a URL out of the domain, and mapping
> > that URL if needed into a domain's internal ID model. There can not be
> > any assumptions about the meaning of the URL received from another
> > domain... it's got to be treated as an opaque token.
> >
> > If you're accessing http://asset_server:port/cap/asset/UUID and the
> > asset doesn't belong to that server, it's gotta return something like
> >
> > 302 Remote asset
> >
> > Location: http://otherguy:theirport/some/opaque/path/and/id
> >
> > And the asset server AND you can't make any assumptions about what
> > "/some/opaque/path/and/id" means.
> >
>
> But....
>
> What if there is a collission between the UUIDs of two different
> domains? Unless you have the entire cap as the new asset ID, there will
> be collisions. I guess, at some point before the meta-grid goes live,
> asset-wise, LL will need to replace all LL-specific UUIDs with
> llDomain_URL caps. Guess that would actually work out fine, come to
> think of it, and should be trivial to implement.
>
> Lawson
>
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20071129/136a225e/attachment.htm