On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 11:38:46AM +0200, Tom Rons wrote: > Well, as far as I know, Carlo's intent with the original P10 specification > (which theoretically allows for 4096 clients per server and 64 servers per > network) was to limit the size of the network, as it would split when it > became too crowded with servers and clients.
That is correct, without a mesh-linked network there is a need for a limit. Perhaps that limit is higher with the current speed of PC's. > Recently however, a patch was applied to the Universal branch to allow for > 262 144 clients (by the way, on the undernet coder-com website, the url > pointing to the n2k information page for u2.10.07 is incorrect, and the > u2.10.07 release page claims 2 621 144 clients per server). So I don't know > if he still wants to limit the size.. Personally however, I do think the > 4096 server capacity in u2.10.10(?) is slightly overkill for the time being > and probably for some years to come, even for Undernet. Definitely, the whole IRC protocol sucks when it comes to scalability and it doesn't look like that is ever going to change. Hopefully people will realize this some day and WWCN will become the new means for chatting. (see http://www.wwcn.org). Universal ircd understands extended numerics just fine (and even works together on a network with mixed universal/undernet servers*). But as long as you DON'T use more than 64 servers or 4096 clients for any server, it doesn't use extended numerics and is thus compatible with existing services. -- Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *) Not anymore with the current 2.10.12.
