Hi Petr. I (as the author of fgms) would be pretty much interrested to implement fgms as part of a HLA infrastructur. What detained me from going that way is, that I found no free (as is free beer) documentation on HLA specifications and the quite complex structure (too complex for a one-man-show). Additionaly I'm not sure about license issues involed. Are we allowed to publish all parts of (our) HLA infrastructur under the GPL (which will kind of undermine cash-flow of documentation providers like the IEEE)?
On Dienstag, 4. März 2008, Petr Gotthard wrote: > Dear FlightGear developers,(a short introduction first: I'm a newcomer to > FlightGear, my professional profile can be found at > http://www.linkedin.com/in/gotthard) May I ask whether you would > be interested on striving to make FlightGear compliant with the US DoD High > Level Architecture (HLA)? It could make FlightGear more attractive. I found > that 1) several FlightGear multiplayer server feature requests at > http://sourceforge.net/projects/fgms suggest to > introduce - subscription-based property management - customizable set of > propagated properties - more efficient data propagation mechanism - global > status for date/time, weather, AI object positions 2) also the description > of "A New Architecture for FlightGear Flight Simulator" proposes a > distributed FlightGear architecture, which would allow all users to see the > same AI > objectshttp://wiki.flightgear.org/flightgear_wiki/images/1/1e/New_FG_archit >ecture.pdf I believe that especially the HLA Declaration Management and Data > Distrib ution Management perfectly match the above mentioned demands.Just > look at Fig.2 in > http://pagesperso-orange.fr/dominique.canazzi/paper.html. It's nothing that > can be achieved in a few days, but I think it's feasible. To have a perfect > solution we'd need to (probably in this order) - turn the FlightGear > multiplayer server into a HLA RTI (run-time environment) - implement the > multiplayer protocol according to HLA standards - factor out (extract) the > non-aircraft objects (weather, AI objects, ATC server, etc.) to enable > global status What is your opinion? I want to start developing a HLA RTI > first, so (if you're interested) there will be plenty of time to discuss > the requirements and architectural issues. One answer in advance: I've seen > an idea to extend FlightGear to support the DIS protocol (a HLA predecessor > and competitor). I believe that HLA is more suitable for this purpose > because it implements Data Distribution Management. Best Regards,Petr ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
