GroupKey2Name/GroupName2Key

I guess someone will use the basic idea below to provide such services

default
{
    touch_start(integer number) {
        key group = llList2Key(llGetObjectDetails(llGetKey(), [OBJECT_GROUP]), 0);
        llHTTPRequest("http://world.secondlife.com/group/" + (string)group, [HTTP_METHOD, "GET"], "");
    }
    
    http_response(key request_id, integer status, list metadata, string body) {
        if (status == 200) {
            integer start = llSubStringIndex(body, "<title>") + 7;
            integer end = llSubStringIndex(body, "</title>") - 1;
            llOwnerSay(llGetSubString(body, start, end));
        } else {
            llOwnerSay("Unknown");
        }
    }
}

What fun!

well I see key to name there... where's the name to key?

Guess that would need a groupname2key database offworld much like the avie name2key dbs.

However, it looks like the url above has already been disabled. So could be the end of the fun.

not disabled, just crippled.... it returns no such key on valid keys now... so much for that... other sections still work

I would tend to expect that the world.secondlife.com functionality to be severely crippled or access from sims curtailed. It is meant to be the back-end for their new search functionality, and given their history with the existing search functionality being so overloaded, I am pretty sure they will be preventing what they consider to be "unnecessary load", which will include sim access, and people mass harvesting their database.

As such, I don't think it would be wise to depend on any scripting functionality which uses it for a data source.

the solution of course is to fake the header as originating from the SL client... which is not hard to do at all....

...for the moment, until they put in IP blocks to prevent sims from accessing those servers, just as they have done for other functions.

I have a pretty good idea Jana/Solar already has the majority of the group names & keys scraped for her own database:

Do a group UUID serves any function outside of the client?

Yep. For a few days we were able to access the LL database and match the name of the group to the key. Comes in handy for sensors etc for when objects are group owned and an avatar name isn't returned. Now we should be able to do the same through the database I mentioned.

Oh, probably. Her and several other folks by now.

..and that's fine if one wishes to depend on a third party for the info. I would rather like it if LL would just give it to us direct in LSL via dataserver queries.

IP blocks aren't gonna do much good when I can set up a proxy redirect, and since the normal requests come from the client.... well I don't suppose their monitoring is all THAT great

Yes, but not everyone can set up a proxy redirect, or would want to depend on someone else's.

maybe I should write a howto? takes like... 5 mins? =)

Please do

Sure. While you are at it, can you pay them the cost of acquiring up a system to run it on that has a static IP address? DynamicDNS on their home DSL/Cable isn't going to work very reliably at all.

Looks like you guys were saying it's not working anymore... It's working in Hyperborea right now, is that a fluke?

Thinking about name2key, remember you can use alot of Google "advanced search" stuff...


If you use Search though... seriously think about having some kind of cache in your script, so we don't end up sharing Search with tens of thousands of scripted objects that unnecessarily search for the same thing repeatedly...

Day Oh.... thank you... I was looking in all the wrong places for that search format


not reliably at all you say? forgetting for the moment all the free hosting sites w/ php, I've been running a web server on my home connection using free dns for .... I dunno about 6-7 years... and have served several hundred gb of content quite reliably from my pokey 700mhz machine.... apache has a nice small foot print, my personal suggestions are apache 2, free dns via afraid.org, and a check to see if your broadband contract allows you to run a server (many don't, mine does).... if it's not a public server you can argue it's purpose is solely personal access to your home machine... you may need to set it up on an off port (which can be added as a redirect in DNS) it takes the time to install, and open a freeDNS account... and a few minutes to set up proxying. or just use php and a hosting service, the php is almost identical to the freely available http respose checker code

All other saerches were working including place, user uuid and user name but searching for group uuid was failing. This same search wouldn't work but is working now:

http://world.secondlife.com/group/28f1aa57-a378-50ef-5017-d8eee6008c11

So either a block was put in on /group and taken back down since cat was already out of bag or may have been problem with google database. Results are still a little iffy but getting better. One heck of a lot of data to scrape.

I think perhaps they blocked it untill they realized it broke something else.... or possibly it was so hammered that it just wasn't returning results in a timely fashion so defaulting to not found.... my vote is on the first guess...

oh and since Day Oh was Kind enough to post it.... that search function is the other half of name to key for groups.... no database required (although as was pointed out, perhaps making a cahcing server would ease the strain on the LL server)

that should also cure the other part of the name to key for av's also, no DB required

Your anecdote may hold true for you, and for some folks, but I wouldn't DEPEND on it on any broadband connection I have ever had, from both DSL AND cable. I used to run my own DDNS server for myself and customers, and my IP address changed so often that it just was not reliable... at all. Thus, I couldn't DEPEND on it. I have had real webservers online since 1998 for things that are reliable and dependable. Not everyone has the $100-$1000 per month to rent/own their own dedicated server, or the expertise to run one, however.



You can't specify ports in DNS. DNS is strictly name to address translation.



Many php hosting services (free and pay) do not make URL libraries available for making external requests, primarily because hackers use them for setting up proxies for managing their bot nets. Same reason many ISPs block IRC traffic ports completely on their network, because IRC is the comm protocol of choice for controlling zombies.

At any rate, you've more than amply demonstrated my point for me.

It would be BETTER if LL would give us LSL access to the data. Period.

pretty rare experience, I've NEVER had an IP change on me with cable while I maintained a connection (ie the router/modem was on and plugged in), unless I forcibly reset it (by using a new MAC #) using 5 different services cox & comcast among them. this experience is echoed by most users of constant on connections (see dslreports.com for a sampling). nevermind that there are applications that can run locally to check and update dns


I suppose it's magical faeries that redirected site.domain.com to realsite.domain.com:8080/ for about 3 years? yeah that must be it ::eyeroll:: afraid.org offers this service for free (with free subdomians), as do various sites like those listed here http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Hosted_Components_and_Services/Redirects/
tecnically most return 301 (which may not translate for lsl http requests, so try the long name+port if not) but I figured it worth mentioning to stop disinformation.


but some do, and home users can do whatever they want.


that you belive your one bad experience, or lack of familiarity with available options equates to "not reliable" and "too hard", or "impossible". I think people can make that assesment for themselves. and really, external name <-> key is hardly mission critical... nice, friendly, useful.... but essential? nah.


don't mind if I go ahead with my own plans while you wait? I'm with you here, but a quick scan of 3+yo bugs in jira suggests it might be a long wait...

So your anecdote trumps mine? Riiiight....

I've been to DSL reports. I see nothing there which references statistics of automatic IP changes. I have been through more than 7 different providers, and only ONE didn't force regular (and frequent) IP changes as part of their policy to prevent servers running on the client end. I know it is an annoyance for quite a few of my customers, family, AND friends, and it figures prominently in my recommendations to my customers regarding obtaining service. Perhaps it is more common in my area than some other places, but I know from other associates in the industry that it is far from "rare".



It is QUITE clear you have no clue how DNS works. There is NO PROVISION in DNS resolution for port forwarding. PERIOD. What you are talking about is an HTTP REDIRECT, which has NOTHING TO DO with DNS at all.

So, yes, it IS "magical fairies", because DNS CANNOT do it otherwise. So, please do us all a favor and stop the disinformation yourself. Thanks.



Some can, some can't. Availability can't be depended on.



How nice of you to put words in my mouth. I didn't say it was "too hard" or "impossible" ANYWHERE. I said it isn't reliable, which is true, since there are plenty of folks who cannot reliably take advantage of it, for one reason or another, as I have pointed out. Yes, of course, they can make that assessment for themselves, but the original point still stands. If LL decides to block third-party access to that function, they most certainly can do it and make technical workarounds almost unfeasible. They may be forced to, if too many folks out there beat on the service hard enough to make it as unresponsive as the previous search system. Don't think for a minute that it won't happen, or that they won't take measures to resolve it.



I've not discouraged anyone from using it; I have only said that it is probably a good idea to not DEPEND on access to it. That won't stop you or anyone else from using it, but don't have the audacity to act shocked and surprised when LL changes it and it breaks a bunch of your products out there.

PWNAGE 10/10

try actually opening up the forums, which refrence a great deal of common practice for a great many providers, including ports commonly blocked, traffic shaping and blocking that isn't listed in respective TOS, and minor things like IP statistics for leases, how to force IP changes on some services, etc ad nauseam


some of it uses redirect(via 301 headers or other means) not all of it, the better services use rewrite, on the DNS server, and while as a nit picking detail, is not part of the DNS Protocol, it IS handled transparently by the DNS provider (for ones that offer it) and therefore part of MY DNS SERVICE. something you claimed wasn't possible to do at all. some services even refer to it as "redirect records" which while technically misleading is figuratively true. I'll take function over form any day.


you want exact words? ok then
"I wouldn't DEPEND on it"but lots do)
"I couldn't DEPEND on it"and still more do)
"You can't specify ports in DNS. DNS is strictly name to address translation." (guess you never heard of extending service capabilities)
"Many php hosting services (free and pay) do not make URL libraries available for making external requests"yet still more do, and people use them, and proxies all the time)


not gonna happen... know why? because the search format isn't built into LL's end, it's built into the viewer, the viewer makes the request. they'd have to shut down or rewrite the entire search sytem to stop it. and really what is being discussed here isn't bombing the search function to provide a bunch of half-assed providers, it's using the given serch function to provide clear relevent results to a specific request, leveraging outside resources (in the form of caching) which would actually REDUCE strain on LL's end.


you definition of "discourage" needs a little work there...

and because I'm true to my word, I'd like to congratulate you, on your new #2 position in my ignore list. I'm tired of the nit-picking BS, that is barely (if at all) relevant to what's be discussed in a thread, and the repeated trolling of things I post. to be fair, it's partly for your benefit, so that I don't lose any more respect for you than I already have.