Re: [hlds_linux] 1.6 Net Code?
Yes it does. I believe you are getting confused with DSL modems, which are really routers. For more information, please see http://www.howstuffworks.com/cable-modem.htm Dave On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 18:28, Jared Eischen wrote: > Even though it's called a "modem", technically it is not because it does not > convert analog -> digital and vice versa. > > - Original Message - > From: "Adam 'Starblazer' Romberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 3:18 PM > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] 1.6 Net Code? > > > > *looks at his cable MODEM* > > > > ;) > > > > Sorry, couldn't resist. > > > > Thanks > > > > -a- > > > > > > > > > > Adam 'Starblazer' Romberg Appleton: 920-738-9032 > > System Administrator > > ExtremePC LLC-=- http://www.extremepcgaming.net > > > > On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Jeff Dupler wrote: > > > > > I agree about this CPU problem, we pay almost $200.00 a month for our > DOD > > > server. Seems to me the worse ping you have the better your chance to > get > > > the kill, no one has modems anymore let's go back to the old Pre 1.5 > netcode > > > when you could run hlds on a P2. > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Re: At what point is a packet considered lost?
Sounds like you're on the right track with the reliable/unreliable message types. HL servers use UDP packets, which are not gauranteed delivery by definition of the protocol. At the IP layer, no acknowledgement is sent back to the sender, so the sender can never be sure that the packet was received. A packet is considered "lost" if it is not received by the recipient. A more complex packet delievery system can be implemented at the application layer using UDP packets, and this sounds like what is done with halflife's reliable/unreliable message types. I am unsure of which HUD icons you are talking about. Servers that have high loss may also be experiencing other problems, and the other problems also could contribute to the phenomena you described. Dave On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 06:50, Niall FitzGibbon wrote: > I don't know a lot about the network protocols, but I do think that lost > packets ARE re-sent by the server -- unless lost packets simply arrive very > late. This is because sometimes when playing on a server with high loss, > HUD status icons will appear much later than they should have (up to a > second or so). Now for those icons and many other components of the Half- > Life message system, the request for the client to display the icon is only > sent only once, in the frame it is activated. The fact that the icons can > appear so much later than they should do suggests that the packet must have > been lost, but the message was still eventually received by the client. > Whether the server re-sends the lost packet (or simply sends the "icon > display" message in a later packet) or whether the packet arrives very, > very late, I'm not sure. However, I've never seen a situation where HUD > icons simply do not appear when supposed to due to packet loss, so I think > there must be some form of re-sending in place (though certainly in high > packet loss servers it is possible for many game sounds to fail to play on > the client -- perhaps this difference a result of Half-Life's > reliable/unreliable message types). > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: FW: [hlds_linux] Behind a Firewall
Optimum online rocks. I used to run a 10 player oz server on an optimumonline cable connection. I used to get about 950kbps up and 10Mbps down. After almost a year of running the server, i got pinched. They put an upload restriction on the line, and I had to move the server elsewhere. It is only a matter of time before you get caught. Don't worry, we won't say anything. Your problem is almost certainly cpu usage. Did you try running top on the server when you are experiencing ping spikes? Dave On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 06:00, Rouven wrote: > Nobody is using a firewall? ;-) > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rouven > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 1:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [hlds_linux] Behind a Firewall > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Hi, have a problem with a firewall. > > I've created rules for: > > > > TCP 7002 out > TCP 5273 out > UDP 27010 out > UDP 27012 in and out > UDP 27015 in > > > > But I still can't reach the server with HLSW. Have I missed some ports? > > Another problem is, that can't get the logfiles of the FW. But this server > has an official ip address, so no NAT environment there. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > Rouven > > -- > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] windows vs. linux admins is a lot less relevantthen what you missed...
There it is: exactly what i wanted. You even threw in a comment about my use of email. Thank you. Right now I have just experimentally installed a Dod server on a win2k3 box, with the hopes that it will outperform our linux boxes, as cpu usage has skyrocketed with version 1.0. As soon as the server gets full, i will give you some interesting and detailed information to comment on. Dave On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 22:59, Stefan Huszics wrote: > antstrength wrote: > > >I propose a different explanation: linux admins like to whine, complain, > >and argue. It is in our nature, being computer geeks. > > > >Take this list, for example. I just followed a thread of at least 20 > >emails, and read nothing but linux guys arguing about how to use their > >mail clients. > > > > > If you would actually pay a bit more attention to that very thread > (before a lot of people started spamming it full of crap) you would have > know about that it also hints at HLDS taking about 1/3 of the CPU power > as HLDS_L does. > If that is anyway near the trought surely you realize that Linuxadmins > _really_ have something to complain about... > If you can fit 3x the ammount of eg CS servers on a windows box then > there is something really really broken on the linux version of HLDS. > Isn't that quite obvious even to you? > > Mayby the root of the problem might even be that Valve have sofar not > really understood them selfs how extreemly bad HLDS_L performs. They > have AFAICT acted highly surprized at all the complaints about the > CPU-req of the .1 series. However the real problem isn't the increase > from .0 to .1 but that this is a continuing trend for many years now, > with each HLDS_L release jsut behaving worse and worse. The .0 -> .1 > (cpu as well as numerous other issues) was just the last drop causing a > lot of admins to clearly state, enough is enough. > > >Would a windows user even waste their time to reply to this posting? > > > > > Perhaps not, at least not if he is as dense as you and don't realize > that he missed some very important info in that CPU resource thread just > becuse some people messed it up with posting compleatly nonrelated > gibberish to that highly interesting thread. If it would not have been > such an extremly interesting & important thread I could not have cared > less about (unintentionally) spamming it to death. > > Now perhaps you could get off your high horse and actually post > something usefull in that Win vs Linux CPU thread instead of starting a > pointless Linux vs Windows admin nonsence thread with the basics of > turing into a flamewar (that ontop of it all even misses a proper [OT] > in the subject). > > -- > /Stefan > > Software never has bugs. It just develops random features. =) > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [ot]RE: [hlds_linux] windows vs. linux admins
In comparison to windows, linux is known for it's stability and dependability. I knew i could depend on linux for a speedy reply to my original post. Dave On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 21:35, James Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 09:24:04PM -0400, Tyler Overkill Schwend wrote: > > Oh come on, I see updates for my Linux boxes just as often as the > > Windows boxes... > > but how often to those updates require a restart? > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Writing and executable script that will restart aserver from a w eb page
This has been around for years. Go to: http://halfd.org Dave On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 08:50, Plitt, Charles wrote: > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand > this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. > -- > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > I was wondering if anyone has ever written an executable script that will allow a > user to stop and restart or reboot a server from a web based application without > rebooting the entire Linux box. If anyone has seen anything like this I would > appreciate any help or suggestions. > > -[e]ffigy | elude > -- > [ Plitt, Charles.vcf of type application/octet-stream deleted ] > -- > [ Blank Bkgrd.gif of type image/gif deleted ] > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] HL engine open-source?
"Stripped down"...that would be the best thing that could possibly happen. Dave On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 14:23, Erik Schaareman wrote: > Hi, > > Does anyone know if maybe Valve would consider making the > HL engine open-source? The new HL2 engine is coming soon, and > some other game developing companies have made their old software > public. Or maybe a stripped version of the engine on which mods like > cs, ns, dod and others can still work... > > e-RIX > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Re: P3 550 performing as a 10-user server
I had a 6 player server running on a Pentium 1 at 100Mhz with 48Mb ram on my home netword. It ran smooth, but the mod was Oz, which uses less CPU than any other mod that i have worked with. Dave On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 12:29, joe_null wrote: > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > << > I've been running a 8 players server on my home server running Gentoo 2nd > stage optimized, with poor hardware as 200MHz and 64mb RAM. > Guess what? it worked smoothly as hell. :-) > >> > > As has been stated before less than 12 players wont feel the pinch (resource > consumption) like a 20 slot server will and thats more than likely why my Cryix > 233mhz still handles the job as well for my 10 person pub, but even I have noticed > over the last three years that resource consumption has increased for my meager 10 > slot. > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Kernel Fun
Oh. When i tried to connect it gave me an error. I've never seen this before: "LAN servers are resticted to local clients (class C). Dave On Sun, 2003-07-27 at 14:20, Daniel Stroven wrote: > These are not LAN servers. They are public. Im in florida and I play on my > servers all the time. According to stats 15,300 players thru the server in > the last 30 days. So definitely not LAN :))) > > > - Original Message - > From: "antstrength" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 11:55 AM > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Kernel Fun > > > > These are LAN servers. I thought they were pub. > > > > Dave > > > > > > On Sat, 2003-07-26 at 02:57, Daniel Stroven wrote: > > > 216.32.201.69:27015 (FF=OFF) > > > 216.32.201.96:27015 (FF=ON) > > > 216.32.201.107:27015 (24/7 Awp_Map) > > > > > > Welcome to come play. > > > > > > dan > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "antstrength" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 12:34 AM > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Kernel Fun > > > > > > > > > > What's the ip/port of your servers? I'm in jersey and would love to > > > > play with a 15-20 ping. > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 17:19, Daniel Stroven wrote: > > > > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > > > > -- > > > > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > > > > I have been experimenting with kernels lately in hopes of improving > > > performance even more. This is based on RH 7.2 or higher. > > > > > > > > > > The "stable" kernel I have been using for last the few months is the > > > 2.4.21-rc1-jam1 kernel/patch set. This runs solid, but one can never be > > > completely satisfied. > > > > > > > > > > Just for backround, I ICMP ping my servers in Jersey at 50-55ms. In > > > game ping on p3 boxes with 14+ players is 70-100. In game ping on xeon > > > boxes with 14+ is around 70-75..more stable on the newer hardware. This > was > > > without pingboost enabled, and on the 2.4.21 kernel. > > > > > > > > > > So the first 2.5.X kernel we got up was 2.5.74-mm3. In game latency > was > > > reduced solidly by 10ms. 55-65 is now my average ping on the Xeon > > > boxes...with 14+ players present. The players living in the area are no > > > longer 20-30ms but 15-20ms in game. > > > > > > > > > > On another box, we put up 2.5.75-mm1 kernel. With the same results, > > > though the .74 kernel, ftp seems to go defunct, but not on the .75 > kernel. > > > > > > > > > > I have just rebooted to 2.6.0-test1-mm2 kernel and will see how well > > > this performs. This kernel replaces the 2.5.74 kernel, leaving > 2.5.75-mm1 > > > still in place. If anyone else is playing with kernels on redhat, I > would > > > be interested in hearing your results. I will reply my results with > this > > > kernel after a week of testing. > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > archives, > > > please visit: > > > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Kernel Fun
These are LAN servers. I thought they were pub. Dave On Sat, 2003-07-26 at 02:57, Daniel Stroven wrote: > 216.32.201.69:27015 (FF=OFF) > 216.32.201.96:27015 (FF=ON) > 216.32.201.107:27015 (24/7 Awp_Map) > > Welcome to come play. > > dan > - Original Message ----- > From: "antstrength" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 12:34 AM > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Kernel Fun > > > > What's the ip/port of your servers? I'm in jersey and would love to > > play with a 15-20 ping. > > > > Dave > > > > > > On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 17:19, Daniel Stroven wrote: > > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > > -- > > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > > > I have been experimenting with kernels lately in hopes of improving > performance even more. This is based on RH 7.2 or higher. > > > > > > The "stable" kernel I have been using for last the few months is the > 2.4.21-rc1-jam1 kernel/patch set. This runs solid, but one can never be > completely satisfied. > > > > > > Just for backround, I ICMP ping my servers in Jersey at 50-55ms. In > game ping on p3 boxes with 14+ players is 70-100. In game ping on xeon > boxes with 14+ is around 70-75..more stable on the newer hardware. This was > without pingboost enabled, and on the 2.4.21 kernel. > > > > > > So the first 2.5.X kernel we got up was 2.5.74-mm3. In game latency was > reduced solidly by 10ms. 55-65 is now my average ping on the Xeon > boxes...with 14+ players present. The players living in the area are no > longer 20-30ms but 15-20ms in game. > > > > > > On another box, we put up 2.5.75-mm1 kernel. With the same results, > though the .74 kernel, ftp seems to go defunct, but not on the .75 kernel. > > > > > > I have just rebooted to 2.6.0-test1-mm2 kernel and will see how well > this performs. This kernel replaces the 2.5.74 kernel, leaving 2.5.75-mm1 > still in place. If anyone else is playing with kernels on redhat, I would > be interested in hearing your results. I will reply my results with this > kernel after a week of testing. > > > > > > dan > > > -- > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Setting up a DoD/HL server.
Using ip is no good for a pub server, because most internet users have dynamically assigned ip addresses. Why not just use wonid? Dave On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 01:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:48:22AM -0400, antstrength wrote: > > As i have learned from this list, it is possible to setup adminmod > > without any client side configuration. I would recommend scrapping the > > encrypted password idea, and using wonid authentication without any > > password. Simply do not enter a password in each line in your users.ini > > file. > > It is only necessary to use name/password authentication for users who > > share a computer with someone else. > > Dave > > Sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that. > > See, that is insufficiently paranoid. I plan to authenticate > using IP AND password. > > -- > I tried to tell her about Marx and Engels, > God and Angels > I don't really know what for > But she looked good in ribbons. > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Server config question
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 17:58, m0gely wrote: > antstrength wrote: > > Not my goal...someone else's. They want to give rcon access to their > > customers, but don't want them to mess with the sv_maxrate, etc. > > Can't the customer just be told not to mess with the rate settings? Seams like > is would be easy enough to automate checking up on. I doubt too many people > would mess with it if losing their account is the result. > > -- > - m0gely > http://quake2.telestream.com/ > Q2 | Q3A | Counter-strike > I think that is a brilliant suggestion. It seems these customers got their admins working too hard! Dave ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Server config question
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 17:16, Brian A. Stumm wrote: > > I know that Rob is working on a way to exec admin commands by saying > things that is authed by wonid matching. suppose kinda like adminmod does. > With this hte admin can set up only the commands he wants his admins to > use and disable rcon. I've also written a web based client for halfd to > admin server via web that allows you to limit what commands can and cannot > be used. Sorry I'm not really sure what your goal is here with your rcon > wrapper. I was getting you want to prevent some commands from being issued > or settings being changed. > Not my goal...someone else's. They want to give rcon access to their customers, but don't want them to mess with the sv_maxrate, etc. The reason they want to give rcon access is so that these customers can have the full functionality of hlsw. For example, hlsw stores all player names in a wonid database if you have the rcon password. This feature is nice. So a custom frontend to halfd won't really help here. What is necessary is to be able to restrict access to a few commands and a few cvars. Dave ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] VAC, Seriously....
On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 03:38, Jared Eischen wrote: > VAC is server side, you can't turn off VAC on the client side and play on > VAC enabled servers... But, however, if everyone stops using VAC and starts using Cheating Death, then non-cheaterse won't have a problem. This list is a good place to get the point across, isn't it? Dave > > - Original Message - > From: "Britt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:00 PM > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] VAC, Seriously > > > > exactly - if VAC is an issue for 'em - let 'em turn it off until the > > problems are resolved - and enable some other type of anti-cheat plugin. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jared Eischen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:19 AM > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] VAC, Seriously > > > > > > > Well, that doesnt allow his clients from playing on outside Internet VAC > > > enabled servers. Which I'm sure he is going to have to deal with when > his > > > clients come in and try and pub it up. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Britt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 9:43 PM > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] VAC, Seriously > > > > > > > > > > no no - if you cant get around - just turn it off - period - thats > what > > > his > > > > point was... pretty clear I thought. advantages and disadvantages > both > > > ways > > > > though. > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Jeremy Brooking" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 10:16 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] VAC, Seriously > > > > > > > > > > > > > Britt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Cant read in between the lines? lol > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And between the lines it says... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your post was pointless in fixing his issue regarding being falsely > > > > banned. > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > archives, > > > > please visit: > > > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > > please visit: > > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Server config question
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 12:38, Douglas Nilsson wrote: > And what client configuration does adminmod require if you go by wonid or > ip? > Can't argue about the cpu usage, haven't tested yet. > > /Douglas > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of antstrength > Sent: den 10 juni 2003 18:33 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Server config question > > > On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 11:42, Tyler "Overkill" Schwend wrote: > > Just use adminmod (I guess AMXMod would do it too) and set up > > access to the various admin_ commands... Anything that isn't > > already a command can easily be made into one. > > > > - > > Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend > > "Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors." > > --- > > Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged: > > Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015 > > http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Behalf Of Florian > > > Zschocke > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:53 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Server config question > > > > > > > > > Serpent wrote: > > > > That's not very acceptable for large game hosting > > > companies. A large amount > > > > of customers love to use HLSW. > > > > > > I am not sure how this is related to HLSW. Are you saying you > > > cannot use HLSW without rcon access? > > > > > > > However I would love to not let them change > > > > the min_rate and max_rate and some others. Should be > > > a way to disable those > > > > from rcon and need to be done via the config only. > > > > > > From this I read that the real point is what you want > > > is to give > > > your customers rcon access. In that case you could use a AM(X) > > > plugin which provides the admin_rcon command but > > > filters out the > > > commands you don't want them to use. > > > > > > Florian. > > > > > > -- > > > Want to produce professional emails and Usenet postings? > > > http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view > > > the list archives, please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > I would recommend amx mod over adminmod, as it uses less cpu and can be > setup to not require any client configuration. > > Dave > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux Using ip addy for authentication is not a good idea because most players have dynamically assigned ip addresses, and some are behind NATs, with one ip address for multiple users. Dave ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Server config question
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 12:38, Douglas Nilsson wrote: > And what client configuration does adminmod require if you go by wonid or > ip? > Can't argue about the cpu usage, haven't tested yet. > > /Douglas > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of antstrength > Sent: den 10 juni 2003 18:33 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Server config question > > > On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 11:42, Tyler "Overkill" Schwend wrote: > > Just use adminmod (I guess AMXMod would do it too) and set up > > access to the various admin_ commands... Anything that isn't > > already a command can easily be made into one. > > > > - > > Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend > > "Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors." > > --- > > Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged: > > Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015 > > http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Behalf Of Florian > > > Zschocke > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:53 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Server config question > > > > > > > > > Serpent wrote: > > > > That's not very acceptable for large game hosting > > > companies. A large amount > > > > of customers love to use HLSW. > > > > > > I am not sure how this is related to HLSW. Are you saying you > > > cannot use HLSW without rcon access? > > > > > > > However I would love to not let them change > > > > the min_rate and max_rate and some others. Should be > > > a way to disable those > > > > from rcon and need to be done via the config only. > > > > > > From this I read that the real point is what you want > > > is to give > > > your customers rcon access. In that case you could use a AM(X) > > > plugin which provides the admin_rcon command but > > > filters out the > > > commands you don't want them to use. > > > > > > Florian. > > > > > > -- > > > Want to produce professional emails and Usenet postings? > > > http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html > > > > > > ___ > > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view > > > the list archives, please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > I would recommend amx mod over adminmod, as it uses less cpu and can be > setup to not require any client configuration. > > Dave > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux I that adminmod required clients to: setinfo _admin-pass MYPASSWORD ...or something like that. No? AMXmod will let you use wonids only, without setting a client password in this manner. Dave ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
