[sldev] Re: [ARCH] Permissions

[Tao Takashi]

2007/9/25, Andre Roche <roamingryozu at gmail.com>:

I do agree the architecture should be extensible.  The real question
> here is, should a basic permissions system be the standard, and how
> basic or advanced should it be.


What does "standard" mean here? I would think the important part for the
protocol is just that it needs to make sure that the permission system can
be plugged.

The policy which I'd think comes close to be the "standard" will probably be
the one by Linden Lab for now basically because they will have the biggest
grid in the beginning. But it will still be just bound to that grid. Other
grids like osgrid or deepgrid might want to choose maybe a system without
permissions or completely different ones (or maybe one that just has a
license field and it's more a contract). The Linden Lab one will most
probably be very much the same as it is right now maybe with additional
permissions regarding grid and region domain transfer.

So in the end we'd have a protocol definition which describes how to define
which permission system to used (or is used by that object/domain/whatever)
and then there will be additional documents describing the various
permission system which people will implement.

- Tao

-- 
taotakashi at gmail.com
http://taotakashi.wordpress.com
http://worldofsl.com

RL: Christian Scholz, cs at comlounge.net
http://mrtopf.de

http://comlounge.net
http://comlounge.tv
http://mrtopf.tv
http://dev.comlounge.net
IRC: MrTopf/Tao_T
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070925/f07615b5/attachment.htm