2022 SUG meetings week #3 summary

WQNC, January 2022 – blog post

The following notes were taken from the Tuesday, January 18th, 2022 Simulator User Group (SUG) meeting. The meeting was recorded by Pantera Północy, and the video is embedded at the end of this summary. Note this summary focuses on the key points of the meeting; where there is something to report, the video should be referred to should full details of the meeting need to be reviewed.

Server Deployments

Please refer to the server deployment thread for the latest updates and information.

  • Tuesday, January 18th saw the SLS Main channel updated to server release 567269, comprising a tools update previously deployed to the RC channels.
  • There is no planned deployment for the RC channels set for Wednesday, January 19th, and they will remain on server release
  • 567269.

In terms of the improvements wrought by the simulator updates, LL states that they have seen a considerable performance increase especially with respect to the number of scripts executed per frame, while Monty Linden added:

I’ve written up some release notes. Relevant points:
  • More script code executing may engage more throttles and drive external http services harder than previously.
  • SSL library updates move http-in/out away from sslv3, tls1.0, tls1.1.
  • This release does move the sims story forward a bit. We have seen http-out targets (llHTTPRequest) that only talk sslv3/tls1.0, for example.
  • Login is unchanged. Web properties have their own story.
In theory, some day, we’ll line up all our ingress and egress points and actually be able to tell you what’s going on there.

Available Viewers

This list reflects those viewers available via the first four links in the LL Viewer Resources section, below.

  • Release viewer: version version – Mac Voice hotfix viewer, January 13 – NEW.
  • Release channel cohorts (please see my notes on manually installing RC viewer versions if you wish to install any release candidate(s) yourself).
    • The Jenever Maintenance RC viewer, version, issued on December 17.
    • The Koaliang Maintenance 2 RC viewer, version, issued on December 17.
    • The Tracy Integration RC viewer version (dated Friday, November 5) issued Tuesday, November 9.
  • Project viewers:
    • Mesh Optimizer project viewer, version, dated January 5, issued after January 10.
    • Performance Improvements project viewer version, dated December 17.
    • Performance Floater project viewer, version, issued September 2.
    • Legacy Profiles viewer, version, dated October 26, 2020.
    • Copy / Paste viewer, version, dated December 9, 2019.

In Brief

  • Some are seeing an uptick in disconnects during teleports, prompting an extended discussion (full context in in the video, interwoven with a discussion on pivot points arising from the previous CCUG meeting).  In short:
    • Frustration has been voiced that Jiras have been raised in the past on specific TP issues and “nothing was fixed”.
    • Regardless, LL are still requesting reports with information – who, from, to, exact time – of teleports that fail in a specific way, filed in a timely manner so that the relevant server files can be reviewed for possible clues / causes.
    • It is the specific nature of the failures that is of particular interest to LL, with more than one user reporting them, as Monty Linden noted, also replying to the critique that because “Lindens are in California” (only partially true) “with tiny ping times”:
I want a handful of user events that match their idea of a *specific* type of TP failure and the data so that I can go trawling for insight. As for ping times, this absolutely does colour how lindens understanding networking issues. But I’m in Boston so have poor ping times as well. All TP/region crossing failures are not the same. I want to filter down on a single type – not the rainbow of failures I already know are present.
    • Logs attached to Jiras for these cases do not necessarily need be be captured using the official viewer.
  • The issue of Friends lists failing to load (see BUG-231680) should be improved / resolved following a (non-simulator) deploy due on Tuesday, January 18th.
  • There has been a noticeable uptick of avatars taking longer to rez / remaining as clouds over the last couple of weeks or so. Some have mistakenly seen this as a simulator issue – although assets come via the CDN. Jiras have been raised on this, and the Lab is looking into matters.

4 thoughts on “2022 SUG meetings week #3 summary

  1. I was pretty sure that my Home Region was on an RC Channel, would restart on a Wednesday, but this week it restarted on Tuesday. Also, the announcement on the Forums described the plan as “All of the RC regions will be bounced and remain on the same version as the previous week.” What does that mean?

    I am not sure I can trust anything Linden Lab says, whether in the Status page, on their main website (including the Forums), or reported via your blog.


    1. I cannot speak to whether any RC regions were restarted on Tuesday, but in terms of the “bounce” comment, I believe that is the term used in reference to the a recently RC channels restart without any deployment. As such, I presume that either it appeared in this weeks notes to indicate the same (as I don’t have any land in an RC region, I have no personal way of knowing if a restart is occurring today (Weds 19th), OR the was a sloppy case of cut’n’paste.

      As to what I relay, all I can do is encapsulate what is directly said by LL, either directly or via questions that generating meaningful feedback that can be summarised / quoted – hence why I include Pantera’s videos, as I simply cannot go through a meeting line-by-line and report on everything, given much of what happens tends to vary between user-to-user statements, repeated comments, supposition, and similar, or simply doesn’t generate a response from LL that adds context. In this particular case, no-one at the SUG meeting seemed to be aware of or queried anything about RC channels in the Tuesday roll, ergo nothing was said by the Lindens in attendance.


  2. @Arabella – Not sure why you’re reading and commenting here, then. People are trying their best to make things work.


    1. In fairness, there can be understandable frustration when something appears to happen and goes unremarked upon, even if raised through official channels such as the server deployment thread or other forum channels actively looked at by LL. So casting wider net for possible explanations and passing comment as Arabella has done isn’t unreasonable. Unfortunately, (and as noted in my reply to her) there is only so much I can do in relaying information (short of just dumping entire text transcripts into this blog which are unlikely to be read or prove helpful!), other than trying to summarise the key discussions and the feedback they generate.


Comments are closed.