Cool, so you have a server too, would you like to link with us? Anyone
else?
On Wed, 3 May 2000, Robin Gilks wrote:
> I've used IRC on packet and it has a considerable overhead (even at the client
> end) compared to convers.
Right, it's not designed for 1200 bit/s packet. 8-) Setting the ping
timers to pretty high values ease up a lot, and adding zlib compression to
the server (it has it for server links already!) and a couple clients
should be trivial if one would devote a few evenings at it.
> Another problem is the synchronising of user
> nicknames - in IRC they can't be duplicated but many times a user will access
> the network via different nodes to try to improve their connectivity and end up
> with several logins.
conversd has some trouble with it too. The behaviour with one username
appearing on multiple servers/directions is undefined and i've seen
funny things happening in that case.
> Having said that, those users that have a good link to the hub here use the IRC
> <> convers gateway that Jens David wrote and it works well (within the
> limitations expected). Shame its not very stable - one day I'll learn to hack
> Perl :-))
I have a somewhat stable single-channel gateway which appears as a
server on the conversd network and an user on the IRC network. I'd rather
keep multiple-channel gateways away from here.
I don't see much sense in writing yet another set of servers and
clients, since IRC simply works, has the features, and is proven to work.
It can be improved to work for us.
Btw, if you remove the file/pipe/exec features from the ircII client (to
make it a bit more secure in this "kiosk-mode" environment), it works just
fine as a linemode client under node or ax25d. I did most of the work for
that already, maybe i should put the code out somewhere.
- Hessu
