@lists.sourceforge.net
*Sent:* Monday, November 17, 2008 9:57:30 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear in IVAO network
Dear Rob,
From your description it appears that I am one of those kids. A 43
year old kid mind you. I am always polite to others on the MP system. I
sometimes perform stunts
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 13:57 +1100, dave wrote:
I think that
if you need to have serious, trying to fly as realistically as
possible events, then go ahead and organise more of them and publish a
code of conduct for those attending. Who knows? you could have it as
often as weekly. Weekend
Dear Rob,
From your description it appears that I am one of those kids. A 43
year old kid mind you. I am always polite to others on the MP system. I
sometimes perform stunts in unusual aircraft and show off just for a
laugh. I demonstrate what can be achieved with practise. I push the
flight
Dave, Thank you for saying what has been on my mind for some time
after reading the previous posts about the kids.
I too spend a great deal of time around KSFO and the kids, and I've
taken the time to help and encourage many with their How do I fly a
helicopter? questions. Yes, it makes me cringe
]
From: dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9:57:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear in IVAO network
Dear Rob,
From your description it appears that I am one
..shouldn't this warrant say a NOTAM to make these old versions,
realistically current? ;o)
Terrain data is not only a question of updates, but a question of
makes. There are a lot of airports to download, and every one sticks
to the one of their preference. There shouldn't be much problem as
Hi all,
..ok, so you have no way of assuring people see the same things at IVAO.
Right, though differences are scarce in practice. But even in real life, you
have no way of assuring others see colors the same way you do (just kiddin
;o) ).
..you fly FG in IVAO using Wintendo??? How do
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:13:50 +0300, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
..shouldn't this warrant say a NOTAM to make these old versions,
realistically current? ;o)
Terrain data is not only a question of updates, but a question of
makes. There are a lot of airports to download, and
I wrote:
It seems
that a large number (often, the majority) of FG-MP users are on the
network to mess around and socialize rather than participate in a
multi-aircraft scenario with any degree of realism.
Arnt wrote:
..my impression from what little I've seen here on this list,
(I haven't
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:23:38 -0800, Alex wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Pep Ribal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The IVAO team could implement a FlightGear compatible interface
into their network. The work would be done on their servers, but
then nothing
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:03:51 +0200, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
..you fly FG in IVAO using Wintendo??? How do these
communicate?
It would be nice to fly FG in IVAO (this is the whole point of
this conversation), whatever platform. I personally prefer
Linux, but
If you are asking how flight simulators in
general communicate with IVAO, there are client applications that do
this: IvAp (for MSFS), Squawkbox (for MSFS, Fly!), X-IvAp (for
X-Plane), etc. It has to be that way because of these simulators not
being open source.
..nor GPL. My
Curtis Olson wrote:
I don't know if this idea has been proposed yet
[...]
The IVAO team could implement a FlightGear compatible interface into their
network.
Yup, this already had been proposed ;-)
I had yet another proposal in mind - but held it back for obvious
reasons. Meanwhile it
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:13:16 +0200, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all,
..ok, so you have no way of assuring people see the same things at
IVAO.
Right, though differences are scarce in practice. But even in real
life, you have no way of assuring others see colors the same
..you fly FG in IVAO using Wintendo??? How do these communicate?
It would be nice to fly FG in IVAO (this is the whole point of this
conversation), whatever platform. I personally prefer Linux, but
as FG is multiplatform, then IVAO would turn multiplatform...
..yeah, but never mind
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:30:58 +0200, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If you are asking how flight simulators in
general communicate with IVAO, there are client applications that
do this: IvAp (for MSFS), Squawkbox (for MSFS, Fly!), X-IvAp (for
X-Plane), etc. It has to be that
Martin Spott wrote:
Curtis Olson wrote:
I believe this is the whole point of Pep bringing up the subject on the
FlightGear mailing list. He would like to work towards a concrete proposal,
and this is the preliminary discussion phase. Let's not beat up the
messenger [too much], ok! :-)
]
From: Matthew Tippett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:34:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear in IVAO network
Note the subtle suggestion of the discussion here
discussions
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear in IVAO network
I know I am usually just a lurker on this list, and when I do poke my head
in, it doesn't always make sense :)
However there is one concern I have about IVAO/FG-MP interoperability which
I
Hi,
First response on this topic from my side.
I don't think the MP servers have to change their philosophy. I don't think
both networks should be merged: it would be better to have the possibility
to choose.
As Rob noticed FlightGear has to deal with a lot of kids (I prefer to cale
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Pep Ribal wrote:
I don't think the MP servers have to change their philosophy. I don't think
both networks should be merged: it would be better to have the possibility
to choose. All this is a personal opinion, but I think your MP should
remain
intact, with
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:19:44 -0800 (PST), Jr. wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
From: Matthew Tippett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:34:12 AM
Note the subtle suggestion of the discussion here.
To avoid
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:31:34 +0300, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The way IVAO has worked so far, as Curt says, is completely plugin
based, in regard of flight simulators, due to the fact that the
simulators that log in are not open source (let's change that!). In
the case of FG,
My suggestion was along these lines, however I was focusing more on
the inter-organization issues than technical.
The technical details in my email was matching yours, that is the
FG-MP server accepts a connection from *any* trusted MP flight
environment. A secure wrapper using public key
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 11:08 PM, Matthew Tippett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If however, IVAO sees the value in allowing FG users access to their
network as 'peer' pilots
Not to forget about acting as controllers, which would be a nice thing
to have too.
--
Csaba/Jester
Robert Black wrote:
[...] Flightgear
should concentrate on making the tools and letting people use them as
they see fit. This ensures the organizations that do right by their
members continue while the ones who do not are not holding their members
hostage because they own the
Note the subtle suggestion of the discussion here.
To avoid exposing/causing concern with the GPL, keeping it completely
internal and not distributing it from IVAO seems like a good idea.
However, this appears to need FG to expand/revise it's MP interface to
allow secure connection of external
Hi all.
Another big issue I was thinking about is how we would deal with our
differences in
terrain data? Maybey we should keep the technicall problems for a later
stage, but
having planes taxi meters above (or below) you just doesn't look good...
As far as I know FG uses the same
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 04:12:06 +0200, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all.
Another big issue I was thinking about is how we would deal with our
differences in
terrain data? Maybey we should keep the technicall problems for a
later stage, but
having planes taxi meters above
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Pep Ribal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The IVAO team could implement a FlightGear compatible interface into their
network. The work would be done on their servers, but then nothing would
need to change on the FlightGear side. The IVAO team would not need to
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:01:59 +0300, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The way authentication is handled so far in IVAO ATC (IvAc) and pilot
(IvAp) clients is a connection popup window that lets you fill VID and
password, which you can retype every time you login, or check for
remember
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:45:00 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pep Ribal wrote:
2008/11/10, Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree that concealing the protocol specs doesn't avoid the
possible hacks, but just makes it harder or postpones them.
Heh, getting a
Pep Ribal wrote:
Regarding why IVAO keeps their protocols closed being a free
community, what I've been always answered is that's for security
reasons. So explaining them that the mentioned open gateway for FG
wouldn't be a security issue is crucial. Developing it in a way that
takes
The way authentication is handled so far in IVAO ATC (IvAc) and pilot
(IvAp) clients is a connection popup window that lets you fill VID and
password, which you can retype every time you login, or check for
remember me. Unfortunately I don't know much more of the internals
of the software, but if
2008/11/10, Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You/they should probably start by explaining to FG developers/users
which sort of security - what an elastic term ! - is meant to be
achieved by not publishing the network protocol.
In other words: The simple fact that there's no officially blessed
The way authentication is handled so far in IVAO ATC (IvAc) and pilot
(IvAp) clients is a connection popup window that lets you fill VID and
password, which you can retype every time you login, or check for
remember me. Unfortunately I don't know much more of the internals
of the software,
Pep Ribal wrote:
2008/11/10, Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree that concealing the protocol specs doesn't avoid the possible
hacks, but just makes it harder or postpones them.
Heh, getting a clue about your favourite network monitor's output is
probably not much harder than reading your
Pep Ribal wrote:
I think the best way to proceed, after reading your posts, is to focus
on this solution: a different (open) protocol for FlightGear inside
IVAO servers. So what I'd ask you is a set of reasons why we should go
for this solution and forget the INL: techical reasons
Please forgive me all these early-morning-no-tea typos
Martin Spott wrote:
[...]
authentication) ? How does the user experience the login procedure when
he prepares for a flight if INL would be the means or transport ?
^^ of
If you/we
Pep Ribal wrote:
The way authentication is handled so far in IVAO ATC (IvAc) and pilot
(IvAp) clients is a connection popup window that lets you fill VID and
password, which you can retype every time you login, [...]
The above comments still don't tell us much about how things are
supposed to
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
The above comments still don't tell us much about how things are
supposed to work, they leave too much room for vague guesses.
To make the story short: If IVAO is really serious about getting
FlightGear on-board, they should approach
Curtis Olson wrote:
I believe this is the whole point of Pep bringing up the subject on the
FlightGear mailing list. He would like to work towards a concrete proposal,
and this is the preliminary discussion phase. Let's not beat up the
messenger [too much], ok! :-)
I'm sorry if this was
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:48:33 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Curtis Olson wrote:
I believe this is the whole point of Pep bringing up the subject on
the FlightGear mailing list. He would like to work towards a
concrete proposal, and this is the preliminary
I think the key thread passing through each posting is mentioning that
the two networks should be bridged.
I don't believe the FG developer/user responses indicate a desire to
have FG act as a IVAO client, bypassing the existing MP network. Most
of the terms used imply a bridging of the two
The way IVAO has worked so far, as Curt says, is completely plugin
based, in regard of flight simulators, due to the fact that the
simulators that log in are not open source (let's change that!). In
the case of FG, where FG itself is open source, and the MP server is
too, there are two approaches,
Hi all,
my name is Pep Ribal. I belong to the Software Development department of the
IVAO network. Some of you might remember me, as I was involved in a project
regarding IVAO-FlightGear interconnection time ago.
That specific project was discontinued, but we at IVAO have not forgotten
about
Hi Pep,
I haven't personally flown in the IVAO network, but if it is staffed by
realistic real world controllers and maintains similar standards of
professionalism as in the real aviation world, then I could see this being a
really nice option for FlightGear pilots.
The biggest challenge here is
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 1:00 AM, Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, I'm not sure if I really should trust the statistics on this page:
http://www.ivao.org/network/servers.php
Nope. Try: http://network.ivao.aero/ao/aio.cgi
Currently (01:25 UTC) 24 controllers and 202 pilots.
--
Thanks for your comments and suggestions.
In the first place, I need to tell you that personally, I'm a free
software guy, and I agree that the best possible solution is always
the GPL license. But this is personal.
BTW, you can find information about IVAO at www.ivao.aero, for those that asked.
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:11:01 +0200, Pep wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all,
my name is Pep Ribal. I belong to the Software Development department
..this is a business enterprise, no?
of the IVAO network. Some of you might remember me, as I was involved
in a project regarding
On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 18:40 -0600, Curtis Olson wrote:
It occurs to me that you might not like this option since it would
reduce the level of control you have over individual clients in the
FlightGear world.
One might suggest that this would be easily resolved by IVAO by simply
ignoring the
Pep Ribal wrote:
We are not willing to publish our server protocol. That means that a
possible module for connecting FG to the servers shouldn't be open source.
BTW, I'm not sure if I really should trust the statistics on this page:
http://www.ivao.org/network/servers.php
According to
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:11 AM, Pep Ribal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are not willing to publish our server protocol. That means that a
possible module for connecting FG to the servers shouldn't be open source.
We have developed a shared library called the INL (IVAO Network Library),
No problem to me regarding GPL...
I'll wait for your contact.
Thanks.
On 1/25/07, Pep Ribal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the interest, Thiago.
Of course all help is welcome, and I'm sure I can learn from your Linux
experience.
However I must stick to the guidelines of the IVAO
Hi all,
I'll explain what brings me here: I'm a member of the IVAO network
(http://www.ivao.aero), which provides a background for flight simmers
and virtual controllers. Perhaps many of you already know about what I'm
going to explain.
Virtual pilots connect to the network either as virtual
Pep Ribal wrote:
What I'm asking to you is some help regarding communication between
Flightgear and the client, which will have to produce an information
flow between the simulator and the server, regarding weather, planes
position, and so on.
Hi Pep,
Over the past few years we've tried
Hi Pep.
I've been working with Linux for a long time, but I'm new with FG stuff.
I can't be your mentor, but I'd like to help you developing this
interface. I think this is an excelent learning oportunity. Can I join your
team?
Thanks.
Thiago Drechsel
On 1/25/07, Pep Ribal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the interest, Thiago.
Of course all help is welcome, and I'm sure I can learn from your Linux
experience.
However I must stick to the guidelines of the IVAO staff, as there are
chances that they host the project (not confirmed yet). But there
should be no problem.
The only
Thanks a lot John, be sure I'll start shooting questions really soon. ;)
I didn't know about the proprietary protocol of VATSIM being such a
problem. Fortunately I've talked to the IVAO dev team, and despite
their protocol is private as well, they keep their old protocol which
they can make
Am Donnerstag 25 Januar 2007 21:09 schrieb Pep Ribal:
lots of HTML
please post no HTML mails to this list
Thanks,
Thomas
--
PhD Student, Dept. Animal Physiology, HU Berlin
Tel +49 30 2093 6498, Fax +49 30 2093 6375
-
Greetings,
X-Ivap is the client from x-plane, and since 0.17, it's GPL, might be a
good start ...
http://xivap.linuxpunk.org/index.php/Main_Page
Pep Ribal a écrit :
Thanks a lot John, be sure I'll start shooting questions really soon. ;)
I didn't know about the proprietary protocol of
61 matches
Mail list logo
