Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Peer-to-Peer Virtual Worlds

Continued from page 1

By Erica Naone

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

"The neat thing about peer-to-peer," says Kulkarni, "is that you only need to know about a few peers around you. Once you know that, then you can learn more and more and find out about all the other objects, and this way, you can scale to an unlimited number of users."

There are other efforts at developing peer-to-peer networks for virtual worlds, such as Solipsis and VAST. These systems use different algorithms to map virtual worlds to peer-to-peer. VastPark CEO Bruce Joy says that the company chose to incorporate NICTA's technology because it meshes well with VastPark's existing structure. "We were trying to [figure out] how to make small spaces that connect together in order to form massive environments," Joy says. NICTA's approach involved subdividing a space so that it could be run by users and scaled as large as necessary. Joy says that initially, he thought the ideas were opposites, but he eventually came to see them as complementary.

Wu-chang Feng, an associate professor of computer science at Portland State University, who researches the network architecture of virtual worlds, says that NICTA's technology is "not suitable for games, but pretty compelling for virtual communities." He explains that games hosted through peer-to-peer networks tend to have problems with cheating, since users can easily access and alter information about, for example, whether an attack breached an opponent's defenses. For worlds focused on social interactions, on the other hand, Feng says that reducing the infrastructure cost through peer-to-peer networks makes sense. He notes, however, that Linden Lab could provide formidable competition to VastPark's approach if the company lets individuals host their own Second Life servers, which is common for popular first-person shooter games. Since Second Life has already made moves to open up its system, Feng sees this as a likely possibility.

While Kulkarni says that NICTA has researched ways of making the peer-to-peer network cheating-resistant, he thinks the system works best for social worlds that include a lot of user-generated content. VastPark is still working on integrating the peer-to-peer technology and expects to open it up for testing to a few members of the public toward the end of this year.

Comments

  • Not as big as hoped
    "not suitable for games, but pretty compelling for virtual communities."

    This had me dubious but hopefull for the whole article untill the paragraph stating my fears.  This system can never be put into a competetive environment due to how easily things can be spoofed if they arn't going to the central server to be checked.

    On the other hand, this is absolutely amazing, allowing for large events in games like Second Life to actually take place without the EXTREME amounts of lag that happens if servers arn't prepared.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    Shiladie
    04/16/2008
    Posts:55
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
  • Croquet
    Peer to peer is a logical approach for popular virtual spaces.  Tech Review wrote last summer ("Second Earth" July/August 2007) about the server dilemma at Second Life.  See:  http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/18911/page6/

    According to the Second Life CTO (at the time) Cory Ondrejka, Linden Lab must purchase and install more than 120 servers every week to keep up. 

    FYI > Croquet is already doing real time peer to peer VR.  And it is open source!  See: http://www.opencroquet.org/
    Rate this comment: 12345

    jdknode
    04/16/2008
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
    • Re: Croquet
      Thanks for the link to Croquet - it looks like a step in the right direction.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      aschrock
      04/16/2008
      Posts:2
  • questions of practicality
    Erica, thanks for another excellent article. It makes me question possible differences in experience of peer-to-peer versus client-server virtual worlds. What would be the effect of turning off a desktop machine that is hosting a section of a virtual world? With peer-to-peer file sharing, the downside is quite minor: you have one less person offering files for download. With virtual worlds, it's unclear to me what would occur. Also, client connections may not be up to the task if they are on certain broadband connections. Cable modem connections throttle upload speeds. Again, not a big deal with the P2P example, but perhaps would be with information-rich, secondlife-style environments. Their environments are pushed to capacity, and they have the advantage of being clustered on a fast connection.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    aschrock
    04/16/2008
    Posts:2

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Microsoft's Many Multitouch Mice
Featured Content
Sponsored by:
White Papers

Twelve ways to reduce costs with SQL Server 2008
Find out how to reduce costs and get more efficient

Download

Total Economic Impact of SQL Server 2008 Upgrade
Forrester reports on increasing productivity and management capabilities

Download 

Achieving Cost and Resource Savings with UC
How Office Communications Server R2 and Exchange Server can make your business smarter and more efficient

Download 

The Compelling Case for Conferencing
Read how you can improve workload support and find IT efficiencies

Download

How Windows Server 2008 R2 Helps Optimize IT and Save you Money
Read how you can improve workload support and find IT efficiencies

Download

Windows Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V Live Migration
See how Windows Server 2008 R2 and Hyper-V enable virtualization and Live Migration

Download
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.