Arron Rainfall

Also, this caveat on the llKey2Name page should probably be removed: There is no opposite function (llName2Key) available. However, there are third-party websites which can be queried using the llHTTPRequest function and the http_response event.

Linden Lab really should purchase a wildcard certificate from a trusted CA. It shouldn't matter even if the wildcard certificate was $500/year(even though you can get them cheaper than that). They got thousands of sims that rich people are paying $300+/month for. There's no reason they couldn't afford a wildcard certificate. They've made it obvious, by not providing any new functions that are considered intuitive and highly demanded(*cough* Name2Key *cough*), that they want the creators of Second Life to take some of the overhead of functionality and putting it on their own servers. The least they can do is use a wildcard certificate issued by a trusted CA so creators can use 3rd party services like AWS SNS or AWS Lambda to deliver data to inworld HTTPS URLs. Linden Lab already has a business relationship with Amazon: https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/linden-lab/ Given this intormation, if Linden Labs absolutely refused to purchase a wildcard certificate, then perhaps they could try to persuade Amazon to recognize Linden Lab Certificate Authority as a trusted CA.

That's true. You do need to setup auto-renewal with Let's Encrypt. I figured it wouldn't hurt to throw that in there though.

I think LL might want to take a look at Let's Encrypt. They are free and they will be issuing wildcard certificates in January: https://letsencrypt.org/2017/07/06/wildcard-certificates-coming-jan-2018.html

I stand corrected, but what if we would like to use 3rd party services such as AWS SNS to deliver data to our scripts? AWS SNS delivers fine to HTTP urls inworld, but fails to deliver data to HTTPS urls. http://docs.aws.amazon.com/sns/latest/dg/SendMessageToHttp.https.ca.html That page states "Amazon SNS will only deliver messages to HTTPS endpoints that have a signed certificate from a trusted CA that Amazon SNS recognizes". It also includes a list of all CAs that AWS recognizes. Here is my Cloud Watch entry.

Are there any plans for LL to stop using self-signed certificates with URLs obtained by llRequestSecureURL?

Work in progress.

Email is something I mostly been experiementing with. I've been reluctant to use it. But if any of you know of any "ideal workarounds", I'd appreciate the feedback.

Well I renamed the thread since this isn't exactly a cure for the bugged email system. However, I still believe the SL email server doesn't correctly manage emails in the email queue and doesn't always report the correct value in the num_left parameter.

I also realize for the change event above(when relocating a prim to a different region), the prim will read the email then, as opposed to when you normally would, however, the attach/drop trick stated above in itself could experience yet another problem with the email queue, so I just go ahead and demolish the email queue then as well. Keep in mind though, the emails could actually be valid emails, so using this for some sort of client/server communication, you would either want to go ahead and process them, or implement some sort of retry/redo in the client.

Hi everyone. A lot of us scripters are aware that the SL email system is rather bugged, but I just wanted to say that I've had a bit of luck with implementing email in the following fashion. This is an "Email Reader" example: default { state_entry() { llOwnerSay("My email address is " + (string)llGetKey() + "@lsl.secondlife.com"); llOwnerSay("Touch me to read emails."); } touch_start(integer total_number) { if(llDetectedKey(0) == llGetOwner()) { llGetNextEmail("", ""); } } // Possible usage: Relocating an object that uses email without having to change its key, and // therefore, its email address. // You do this by right-clicking the object, attaching it to your body, then // after relocating it to a different region, right-click and DROP it(do *NOT* detach it). // Remember to set to the appropriate group if needed, so the script can run. changed(integer change) { if((change & CHANGED_REGION) || (change & CHANGED_TELEPORT)) { llGetNextEmail("", ""); } } email(string time, string address, string subject, string message, integer num_left) { llOwnerSay(message + "\n" + (string)num_left + " left to read."); if(num_left) { llGetNextEmail("", ""); } // You're probably thinking this next bit is redundant(since num_left is 0), but the SL email server // apparently can lose track of how many emails are in the email queue so... else { integer i; for(i = 0; i < 100; i++) // ... since the email queue limit is 100, demolish it ON PURPOSE. // "On purpose" being the key phrase, because again, the SL email server apparently // can lose track of how many emails are in the email queue. // The "num_left" that you are getting from the SL email server above *could* in fact be wrong. { llOwnerSay((string)i); llGetNextEmail("", ""); } llOwnerSay("No more emails."); } } } The changed event code is primarily for when you relocate to a different region and you need a prim to keeps its key(it would then take advantage of the following...), however the MEAT of this example lies with the code shown in the email event, in particular the "else" statement. Now normally, this "else" bit of code would appear to be redundant(after all, num_left is 0 right?), and in a bug free email system, it *would* in fact be. However, I am not so sure that the "num_left" parameter being received is in fact correct 100% of the time(there were times I would send the prim 3 emails, but num_left would be begin at 2). So instead of relying on the "num_left" parameter, I did this: The email event documentation located at http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Email states "The email queue is limited to 100 emails, any email after that is bounced", so instead of believing what happens to be the value of the "num_left" parameter, I take it upon myself to get rid of any and all emails that might happen to remain in the email by performing 100 llGetNextEmail calls. So fellow scripters, if you could, please try implementing the code above and let me know how you fair with it.

Jenni Darkwatch wrote: If you want to just use the permission system, "builder packs" aren't possible. I personally don't go by just the permission system. I go by: the TOS, the permission system, and the creator's own terms of use. However, a lot of people disregard the creator's terms of use. Quite frankly, I'm glad builder packs are available because I'm a much better scripter than I am a builder.

Thanks for all the input so far. I've always been more of a TOS and permissions system advocate when it comes to determining if someone is legitimately selling/reselling something(hence the debate with my friend), however* I will respect a creator's own terms of use . From what I understand, unless the creator specifies their own license, the TOS and permissions system govern what's acceptable and what's not acceptable for you to do, so long as you too are in compliance with the TOS and permissions system. I know that there are copyright laws that take it deeper than that, but so long as no copyright laws apply and you don't specify your own license, then by default the TOS and permissions system apply, which means that if you sell something full perms and you don't specify any terms of use, they can copy it until their inventory explodes, modify it until their hands fall off, and give it away or sell it for millions and millions of dollars - and it's all set out in the TOS, specifically section 7.3 of the TOS. Really, I believe if you don't want something distributed, you should make it either copy or transfer, but not both.

Hi all. :matte-motes-smile: I was having a disussion with a friend via IM about this item that I wanted to sell on the marketplace and it ended up turning into a debate because of something I was wanting to sell on the marketplace. What I have purchased is a full perm linkset. The creator of the linkset has given permission to use the linkset in a build to sell so long as it's not given away, resold as-is, and not sold full perm. The linkset is not scripted and provides no functionality at all, but it's a very good looking linkset, which is why I wanted to use it. What I have done is created a script which gives the linkset its appropriate functionality. The build itself was complete so I was going to list it on the marketplace and then I realized that the creator would show up as the creator of the linkset, not me. So what I did was create a new prim, linked it to the linkset with my prim as the root prim and moved the script over to my prim. That way I would show as the creator. My friend told me I shouldn't do that because I would be claiming authorship of the linkset, in effect, I would be stealing another person's creation. However, I was not convinced that this was true. What I have created is a product in and of itself. If someone saw this product in world and decided they wanted to buy it themselves, they would look up the creator. If the linkset creator is shown as creator, the person would be led to a product that provides no functionality at all. If I set myself as the creator, as I did with the root prim, they would be able to find the actual product they were looking at. Another thing I mentioned to her was the issue of customer support. Leaving the linkset creator as creator could result in customers contacting the linkset creator for support of a product they didn't even create. I just wanted to get some public opinion on the matter before I took any further action. I was even thinking of mentioning the creator of the linkset on the product page, and maybe even give them a distribution. I don't know. I just want to do what's right.