[x3d-public] Distributed Interactive Simulation Component

GPU Group gpugroup at gmail.com
Fri Apr 6 11:33:02 PDT 2018

Q1. should DIS be dropped from future specs
Q2. is there a more web3d-like way to do something like it?

I can see why this isn't widely implemented.
x half-baked - looks like student papers - just a prototype or proof of
x only one implents it -xj3d-, and I have yet to see it run with DIS nodes
(it whitescreens on me when run from x3d-edit), so difficult to reverse
engineer fuzzy concepts
x the flavor of some nodes like radio transmitter, receiver, signal seems
too specific/high level compared to the rest of web3d which is more about
general capabilites that can be combined flexibly in many permutations
x the DIS specs are very 1990s like
x DIS specs are big

But it also seems to fill some gaps versus EAI:
* node level synchronization (versus EAI access via rootnode > tree)
**- so easier to bury inside proto bodies
* wireline protocol
** so compatible among any browsers or utilities that implement the protocol
* no server -peer-to-peer, nothing bad happens if peers join or leave

And it has problems:
- using broadcast udp means no ACK / resend if packet lost
- better at regular / heartbeat updates
-- if one is dropped, just wait a few seconds
-- if peer joins late, just wait a few seconds
x, poor at one-time state intializations / transfers
xx if packet lost, DIS spec full of bandaids for this issue
xx if peer joins late, awkward
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20180406/62958323/attachment.html>

More information about the x3d-public mailing list