"J.W. Bizzaro" wrote: > Brad Chapman wrote: > > > > It seemed to me the plan is pretty controversial since it proposes > > that all remote communication occur through the definition layer (the > > middle scripting layer) and not at the level of node processing. It > > was based on my attempts (probably failed) to learn about methods > > for implementing distributed systems based on Jarl's suggestion that > > all remote note authentication should occur in the definition layer. > > The proposal is basically derived from some systems I read about where > > the corba/distributed layer was implemented separately from the layers > > that do the actual work (the processing layer in our case). I tried to > > adapt it to the vsh setup. > > I thought communication (between cores) would occur in the brokering layer. > This is what GMS was going to handle, right? If communication occurs through > the Python-based definitions layer, what is the broker layer used for? It > must be used for more than communicating with Overflow (processing layer). Like the name already suggest: brokering layer, so the comm. between instances will be handled by the BL (gms). I dont know what is Brad want to build, but it seem to have something to do with DL specific stuff.