RE: [hlds] [OT] Serverwiki Thank you
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- Glad to contribute :) even if you keep having to fix my mistakes :P Rick Payton, IT Support Morikawa Associates (808) 572-1745 http://www.mai-hawaii.com/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Mike Miller Sent: Thu 10/20/2005 7:06 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com; hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: [hlds] [OT] Serverwiki Thank you -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Apologies for posting this here, but these guys need some recognition. Just a big thanks to everyone who's been helping out with ServerWiki.org the past week or so. It's taken off faster than I ever could have dreamed it would. A special thanks to HoundDawg, FreekBoy, Deadsexy, Leopard, and Whisper for all the hard work you've done. You guys embody what it means to be part of a community. Thanks again to everyone who's submitted, added, corrected, edited, or even visited ServerWiki! We've come a long way in a short time, but we still have a very long way to go! -- Mike DaiTengu Miller Serverwiki Founder http://www.serverwiki.org H^2 | http://www.daitengu.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- [ winmail.dat of type application/ms-tnef deleted ] -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] Bots and CSS
Mr. Reynolds, It appears some are experiencing an issue initially experienced in February of this year. Specifically the issue is that servers have been running successfully with bots for months; we receive an update at time of release for DOD:S and now bots are crashing some Windows based systems. Could you tell us if Valve is more than peripherally aware of the situation, and if anything is being considered to rectify the situation? Perhaps a redefining the minimum machine requirements for a Windows 200x Server if that is the problem? I believe that there was another update sometime after the February fiasco that also made adding bots without players difficult, someone came out with a workaround that was very successful -- that particular issue did not present itself with the C++ errors seen at this time (and seen back in February). Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Do you have any recommendations? Perhaps how to get data populated in the MDMP files that are created at crash time to help diagnose? I appreciate your time, as always, and look forward to your reply. Sincerely, Bud Ingram ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] VALVe is always aware - whether or not they react right a way is something else... On 10/21/05, Bud Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Reynolds, It appears some are experiencing an issue initially experienced in February of this year. Specifically the issue is that servers have been running successfully with bots for months; we receive an update at time of release for DOD:S and now bots are crashing some Windows based systems. Could you tell us if Valve is more than peripherally aware of the situation, and if anything is being considered to rectify the situation? Perhaps a redefining the minimum machine requirements for a Windows 200x Server if that is the problem? I believe that there was another update sometime after the February fiasco that also made adding bots without players difficult, someone came out with a workaround that was very successful -- that particular issue did not present itself with the C++ errors seen at this time (and seen back in February). Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Do you have any recommendations? Perhaps how to get data populated in the MDMP files that are created at crash time to help diagnose? I appreciate your time, as always, and look forward to your reply. Sincerely, Bud Ingram ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] port answer from servre providors.
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] i got this answer from the ppl i buy my dual xeon servers from. Updated by: Harpreet Singh at Oct 21 01:49 Hello Joe, 2 IPs do not have 2 ports. There is only one port. If you have one port sending traffic to two separate IP's to two separate applications then you might run into lag issues. Lag issues might be because of Network Latency at times. so i am saturating a port trunk by having to large servers running on different ip's but sharing the same port -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] port question
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] As expected.. Thanks for the response tho m8!! --Ozz -- Original message -- the servers with same ports seemed to lag and one 66 tic without didnt - Original Message - From: Gary To: ; Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 5:51 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] port question You won't. At 02:01 PM 10/20/2005, [xXx] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: your right there too oz, i would like to see if i get even better latency with diff ports G. Stanley Engineering Velocity Servers, DBA [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] port answer from servre providors.
ya , ive already moved my 60 man source off of the 27015 port. we will suffer from lack of players for a while, but better than lagging customers lol - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 11:30 AM Subject: Re: [hlds] port answer from servre providors. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Yes, this is what I assumed in my reply previously. It is only logical that 1 device or network feed would have to work a little harder to maintain the constant feeds, and a side effect is always latency. Nanoseconds do add up, just like pennies!!! I assume you are going to use seperate ports for all your servers from now on, yes?? --Ozz -- Original message -- This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] i got this answer from the ppl i buy my dual xeon servers from. Updated by: Harpreet Singh at Oct 21 01:49 Hello Joe, 2 IPs do not have 2 ports. There is only one port. If you have one port sending traffic to two separate IP's to two separate applications then you might run into lag issues. Lag issues might be because of Network Latency at times. so i am saturating a port trunk by having to large servers running on different ip's but sharing the same port -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Bots and CSS
Heh, some other vendors I FEAR may have forgotten to even listen to the community when the scream about security updates. At least my Valve servers are relatively secure. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian M Frain (eternal) Sent: 21 October 2005 18:41 To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Bud, You would probably get a lot farther towards a response if you didn't post with such cynicism and hidden jabs. We all get a little irked when updates go bad but keeping in mind I have nothing to do with Valve and even I felt a little insulted at your post. You know what they say, you catch more flies with honey. Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. On 10/21/05, Tyler Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] VALVe is always aware - whether or not they react right a way is something else... On 10/21/05, Bud Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Reynolds, It appears some are experiencing an issue initially experienced in February of this year. Specifically the issue is that servers have been running successfully with bots for months; we receive an update at time of release for DOD:S and now bots are crashing some Windows based systems. Could you tell us if Valve is more than peripherally aware of the situation, and if anything is being considered to rectify the situation? Perhaps a redefining the minimum machine requirements for a Windows 200x Server if that is the problem? I believe that there was another update sometime after the February fiasco that also made adding bots without players difficult, someone came out with a workaround that was very successful -- that particular issue did not present itself with the C++ errors seen at this time (and seen back in February). Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Do you have any recommendations? Perhaps how to get data populated in the MDMP files that are created at crash time to help diagnose? I appreciate your time, as always, and look forward to your reply. Sincerely, Bud Ingram ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] No Rick I wasn't, Bud used a nice tactic where you use intelligent sounding phrasing and what appears to be a well thought out post but in truth it is disguising sarcasm and negativity. I would much rather deal with the majority of the community, it is easier to see where you stand when someone says Valv3 OMFG fix this you SUXXORZZ!!1!! than Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Now again, don't get me wrong, I get just as frustrated with the recent updates as the rest of this group. I was merely trying to point out to Bud that maybe he needs to think about using disguised negativity in his posts if he wants his LEGITIMATE concerns addressed (and they are legitimate). I am now, and true to this mailing list, having to defend something that was merely meant to be helpful and is now being taken too far and out of context. It seems we thrive on conflict here instead of just taking advice as it is given. Bud, I really didn't mean a whole lot by it, I was merely stating that I thought you were a bit harsh with what appeared to be misleading statements and that in the future maybe you should just be more direct. To those that are offended by MY post I will quote what I said the first time Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. Take it for what you will. On 10/21/05, Rice, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian, too late!! There is nothing wrong with Bud's post. He made no obviously harsh statements that warranted your return post. I tend to think that the nicer you are on these lists the more criticism you get. I think you were referring to Tyler's response, at least I am hoping you were. If you weren't, then my previous statement really holds true!! Most people on this list do not show half the respect to VALVe that Bud did. RR -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian M Frain (eternal) Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:41 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Bud, You would probably get a lot farther towards a response if you didn't post with such cynicism and hidden jabs. We all get a little irked when updates go bad but keeping in mind I have nothing to do with Valve and even I felt a little insulted at your post. You know what they say, you catch more flies with honey. Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. On 10/21/05, Tyler Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] VALVe is always aware - whether or not they react right a way is something else... On 10/21/05, Bud Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Reynolds, It appears some are experiencing an issue initially experienced in February of this year. Specifically the issue is that servers have been running successfully with bots for months; we receive an update at time of release for DOD:S and now bots are crashing some Windows based systems. Could you tell us if Valve is more than peripherally aware of the situation, and if anything is being considered to rectify the situation? Perhaps a redefining the minimum machine requirements for a Windows 200x Server if that is the problem? I believe that there was another update sometime after the February fiasco that also made adding bots without players difficult, someone came out with a workaround that was very successful -- that particular issue did not present itself with the C++ errors seen at this time (and seen back in February). Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Do you have any recommendations? Perhaps how to get data populated in the MDMP files that are created at crash time to help diagnose? I appreciate your time, as always, and look forward to your reply. Sincerely, Bud Ingram ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS
Brian, I would ask that you try not to over analyze my post, I did not intend for any hidden agenda to come through, was not trying to produce a shovel-full of sarcasm, or make any quick jabs hoping no one would be the wiser. I appreciate your concern, but wanted to make certain that I posted the situation as I see it and as I have identified from several attempts to get help from both the community on this specific issue. I am happy to report that I became frustrated enough to FIX my own problem and am about to share it with everyone on the list, but again, I am not intentionally providing sarcasm as I do so. I had never bothered to remove the entire HL2Server directory on my machine, only the CSTRIKE. I removed *everything* and reinstalled... Lo and behold, my server is now able to stay up for more than 10 minutes with bots (as of the time of this message, I have had it running for 40 minutes and am ready to leave for the day). So, if anyone else is having issues with Bots crashing their system after the last update, please remove EVERYTHING on your machine for Valve, then reinstall the HLDSUPDATETOOL and start from scratch. Now I did NOT dump my MOTD.TXT or my Server.CFG, but did dump everything else. I even have the latest Beetlesmod Beta running!! Again, my original post seeking help this morning was not loaded intentionally with sarcasm or criticism, I was genuinely seeking assistance. If anyone read it as sarcasm, I appreciate the feedback an will keep in mind that regardless of my intent, people may misconstrue, and assign their own perceived motive to, my posts. Regards, Bud Ingram - Original Message - From: Brian M Frain (eternal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] No Rick I wasn't, Bud used a nice tactic where you use intelligent sounding phrasing and what appears to be a well thought out post but in truth it is disguising sarcasm and negativity. I would much rather deal with the majority of the community, it is easier to see where you stand when someone says Valv3 OMFG fix this you SUXXORZZ!!1!! than Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Now again, don't get me wrong, I get just as frustrated with the recent updates as the rest of this group. I was merely trying to point out to Bud that maybe he needs to think about using disguised negativity in his posts if he wants his LEGITIMATE concerns addressed (and they are legitimate). I am now, and true to this mailing list, having to defend something that was merely meant to be helpful and is now being taken too far and out of context. It seems we thrive on conflict here instead of just taking advice as it is given. Bud, I really didn't mean a whole lot by it, I was merely stating that I thought you were a bit harsh with what appeared to be misleading statements and that in the future maybe you should just be more direct. To those that are offended by MY post I will quote what I said the first time Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. Take it for what you will. On 10/21/05, Rice, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian, too late!! There is nothing wrong with Bud's post. He made no obviously harsh statements that warranted your return post. I tend to think that the nicer you are on these lists the more criticism you get. I think you were referring to Tyler's response, at least I am hoping you were. If you weren't, then my previous statement really holds true!! Most people on this list do not show half the respect to VALVe that Bud did. RR -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian M Frain (eternal) Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:41 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Bud, You would probably get a lot farther towards a response if you didn't post with such cynicism and hidden jabs. We all get a little irked when updates go bad but keeping in mind I have nothing to do with Valve and even I felt a little insulted at your post. You know what they say, you catch more flies with honey. Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. On 10/21/05, Tyler Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] VALVe is always aware - whether or not they react right a way is something else... On 10/21/05, Bud Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Reynolds, It appears some are experiencing an issue initially experienced in February of this year. Specifically the issue is that servers have been running successfully with bots for
Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] well written response Bud, kudos. On 10/21/05, Bud Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian, I would ask that you try not to over analyze my post, I did not intend for any hidden agenda to come through, was not trying to produce a shovel-full of sarcasm, or make any quick jabs hoping no one would be the wiser. I appreciate your concern, but wanted to make certain that I posted the situation as I see it and as I have identified from several attempts to get help from both the community on this specific issue. I am happy to report that I became frustrated enough to FIX my own problem and am about to share it with everyone on the list, but again, I am not intentionally providing sarcasm as I do so. I had never bothered to remove the entire HL2Server directory on my machine, only the CSTRIKE. I removed *everything* and reinstalled... Lo and behold, my server is now able to stay up for more than 10 minutes with bots (as of the time of this message, I have had it running for 40 minutes and am ready to leave for the day). So, if anyone else is having issues with Bots crashing their system after the last update, please remove EVERYTHING on your machine for Valve, then reinstall the HLDSUPDATETOOL and start from scratch. Now I did NOT dump my MOTD.TXT or my Server.CFG, but did dump everything else. I even have the latest Beetlesmod Beta running!! Again, my original post seeking help this morning was not loaded intentionally with sarcasm or criticism, I was genuinely seeking assistance. If anyone read it as sarcasm, I appreciate the feedback an will keep in mind that regardless of my intent, people may misconstrue, and assign their own perceived motive to, my posts. Regards, Bud Ingram - Original Message - From: Brian M Frain (eternal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] No Rick I wasn't, Bud used a nice tactic where you use intelligent sounding phrasing and what appears to be a well thought out post but in truth it is disguising sarcasm and negativity. I would much rather deal with the majority of the community, it is easier to see where you stand when someone says Valv3 OMFG fix this you SUXXORZZ!!1!! than Does Valve have some agenda to prevent bots from being on a server when no humans are playing? I do not believe that that is true, but there is some suspicion at this point. Now again, don't get me wrong, I get just as frustrated with the recent updates as the rest of this group. I was merely trying to point out to Bud that maybe he needs to think about using disguised negativity in his posts if he wants his LEGITIMATE concerns addressed (and they are legitimate). I am now, and true to this mailing list, having to defend something that was merely meant to be helpful and is now being taken too far and out of context. It seems we thrive on conflict here instead of just taking advice as it is given. Bud, I really didn't mean a whole lot by it, I was merely stating that I thought you were a bit harsh with what appeared to be misleading statements and that in the future maybe you should just be more direct. To those that are offended by MY post I will quote what I said the first time Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. Take it for what you will. On 10/21/05, Rice, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian, too late!! There is nothing wrong with Bud's post. He made no obviously harsh statements that warranted your return post. I tend to think that the nicer you are on these lists the more criticism you get. I think you were referring to Tyler's response, at least I am hoping you were. If you weren't, then my previous statement really holds true!! Most people on this list do not show half the respect to VALVe that Bud did. RR -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian M Frain (eternal) Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:41 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Bots and CSS -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Bud, You would probably get a lot farther towards a response if you didn't post with such cynicism and hidden jabs. We all get a little irked when updates go bad but keeping in mind I have nothing to do with Valve and even I felt a little insulted at your post. You know what they say, you catch more flies with honey. Just a little info and it is in no way meant to start an issue. On 10/21/05, Tyler Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] VALVe is always aware - whether or not they react right a way is something else... On 10/21/05,
