Re: [hlds] New srcds exploit
Actaully, just typing physics_select crashes the server @ the console.physics_select ./srcds_run: line 352: 23321 Segmentation fault $HL_CMD Add "-debug" to the ./srcds_run command line to generate a debug.log to help with solving this problem Fri Jan 30 13:03:47 EST 2009: Server restart in 10 seconds -Original Message- From: "Tony Paloma" Sent 1/30/2009 12:40:45 PM To: "'Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list'" , "'Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list'" Subject: [hlds] New srcds exploitHello! Just got a mysterious crash on one of my servers right now! Luckily, I had my debug log going. User was spamming chat: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster STEAM_0:1:8368633: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] say www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=558846 [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster STEAM_0:1:8368633: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] say www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=558846 [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster STEAM_0:1:8368633: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] say www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=558846 [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster STEAM_0:1:8368633: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] say www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=558846 [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster STEAM_0:1:8368633: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] say www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=558846 [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster STEAM_0:1:8368633: [01/30/09 11:07:57 AM] say www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=558846 Followed by him disconnecting: [01/30/09 11:08:03 AM] HookDisconnect(Disconnect by user., 10, Chrisaster) [01/30/09 11:08:03 AM] ClientDisconnect(10, Chrisaster, STEAM_0:1:8368633) [01/30/09 11:08:03 AM] ClientDisconnect finish. And then he reconnects and immediately executes a command. Seems very strange. He hadn't even loaded or reached ClientActivate or anything yet. He must have some kind of special script or program helping him out. [01/30/09 11:08:06 AM] HookConnectClient(86.3.55.24:32105, 14, 65886321, 3, "Chrisaster", "") [01/30/09 11:08:06 AM] HookGetFreeClient [01/30/09 11:08:06 AM] HookConnect(Chrisaster, 509, 10) [01/30/09 11:08:06 AM] ClientConnect(10, Chrisaster, 86.3.55.24:27005) [01/30/09 11:08:06 AM] Command on client 10 Chrisaster : [01/30/09 11:08:06 AM] physics_select And then it crashed. No core dump was produced which is also strange. Anyways, use the various plugins out there to block/remove this command. I couldn't reproduce this by using commands. I tried doing physics_select while in game and I tried doing "connect ; physics_select; wait; physics_select" and it also didn't work. Thanks, Tony ___ 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] L4D Dedicated server behind NAT problems?
This is a confirmed bug on steampowerd forumshttp://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=751344 - "Dedicated servers behind NAT/router with local LAN IPs are unconnectable via direct 'connect'-command through console, or Steam Group Servers-list. These NATted servers can be connected via the normal matchmaking lobby. Checking the console after a failed connect reveals the cause: [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::ResolveDedicatedAddress(192.168.0.12 :27015). L4D matchmaker somehow digs up the internal IP address, instead of the external one, even if the game does connect to the correct external IP initially (console shows the external IP as well, before resolving it again to the internal one). Was present in the demo, and is still present in the full version." [confirmed] -Original Message- From: "William Stillwell - KI4SWY" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 11/19/2008 9:04:52 AM To: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list" Subject: Re: [hlds] L4D Dedicated server behind NAT problems?I have same problem, and had been tearing my hair out for over a week, it didn't work in the demo version either. -Original Message- From: "Brian Hashman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 11/19/2008 7:45:09 AM To: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list" Subject: Re: [hlds] L4D Dedicated server behind NAT problems?I'm seeing the same thing on one of my servers that has to use NAT. Leaving it open to the public lets people join fine, and so does using the connect command. Setting our steamgroup and having sv_steamgroup_exclusive 1 won't let anyone join from the Steam Group Servers section, it just drops them to a lobby. Brian On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 4:49 AM, ainmosni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey all, > > I'm trying to set up a dedicated server for my steamgroup but I'm having > trouble actually using it... > > I've set it to be exclusive to my steam group but when I connect to it I > see this: > > 109.079: Sending UDP connect to 217.115.196.210:27015 > Server using lobbies #2, requiring pw no, lobby id 0 > Server approved grace request... > Retrying connection to 217.115.196.210:27015, server requires lobby > reservation but is unreserved. > Received game details information from 217.115.196.210:27015... > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnLevelLoadingFinished( No Error, , ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnFrameClosed( 2, 21 ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnGameUIActivated( delay = 0 ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::CloseAllWindows() > [L4DUI] After close all windows: > [L4DUI] OnOpen( `MainMenu`, caller = ``, hidePrev = 1, setActive > 1, wt=22, wpri=0 ) > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 0 -> 10 ) ( MMSTATE_INITIAL -> > MMSTATE_SESSION_DISCONNECTING ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnGameUIActivated( delay = 0 ) > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 10 -> 0 ) ( > MMSTATE_SESSION_DISCONNECTING -> MMSTATE_INITIAL ) > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 0 -> 0 ) (NONE - NONE) > [L4DMM] CMatchGame::RemoveAllPlayers > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 0 -> 0 ) (NONE - NONE) > [L4DMM] CMatchGame::RemoveAllPlayers > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::CloseAllWindows() > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnFrameClosed( 0, 22 ) > [L4DUI] After close all windows: > [L4DUI] OnOpen( `GameLobby`, caller = ``, hidePrev = 0, setActive > = 1, wt=10, wpri=0 ) > [L4DUI] Starting lobby... game slots = 4 > game mode = 0 > public slots = 4 > difficulty = 1 > experience = 0 > skill0 = 0 > skill1 = 0 > skill2 = 0 > skill3 = 0 > skill4 = 0 > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 0 -> 2 ) ( MMSTATE_INITIAL -> > MMSTATE_CREATING ) > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 0 -> 1 ) (NONE - CREATING) > [L4DUI] StartPartyLobby: lobby started = true > [L4DUI] CUIGameData::Notify( SERVERS_USER_GROUPS_SEARCH_COMPLETED, 0, 0) > [L4DMM] CSession::GetSessionId() => sessionid = 184010d6b02a009 > [L4DMM] CSession::UpdateCreating() => sessionid = 184010d6b02a009 > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking(state = 2)::SessionNotification( 17(CREATED_HOST), 0 ) > [L4DUI] CUIGameData::SessionNotification( 17, 0 ) > Host: CreateSession successful > [L4DMM] CMatchGame::AddPlayer( 11100a0df55 ) > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 2 -> 4 ) ( MMSTATE_CREATING -> > MMSTATE_ACCEPTING_CONNECTIONS ) > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 1 -> 3 ) (CREATING - IDLE) > [L4DMM] Avatar assignment: >Player 1: [[Awesome] ainmosni |BRB.u|]: Louis > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::ResolveDedicatedAddress(172.29.36.210:27015) > maxplayers set to 14 > [L4DUI] CUIGameData
Re: [hlds] L4D Dedicated server behind NAT problems?
I have same problem, and had been tearing my hair out for over a week, it didn't work in the demo version either. -Original Message- From: "Brian Hashman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 11/19/2008 7:45:09 AM To: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list" Subject: Re: [hlds] L4D Dedicated server behind NAT problems?I'm seeing the same thing on one of my servers that has to use NAT. Leaving it open to the public lets people join fine, and so does using the connect command. Setting our steamgroup and having sv_steamgroup_exclusive 1 won't let anyone join from the Steam Group Servers section, it just drops them to a lobby. Brian On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 4:49 AM, ainmosni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey all, > > I'm trying to set up a dedicated server for my steamgroup but I'm having > trouble actually using it... > > I've set it to be exclusive to my steam group but when I connect to it I > see this: > > 109.079: Sending UDP connect to 217.115.196.210:27015 > Server using lobbies #2, requiring pw no, lobby id 0 > Server approved grace request... > Retrying connection to 217.115.196.210:27015, server requires lobby > reservation but is unreserved. > Received game details information from 217.115.196.210:27015... > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnLevelLoadingFinished( No Error, , ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnFrameClosed( 2, 21 ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnGameUIActivated( delay = 0 ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::CloseAllWindows() > [L4DUI] After close all windows: > [L4DUI] OnOpen( `MainMenu`, caller = ``, hidePrev = 1, setActive > 1, wt=22, wpri=0 ) > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 0 -> 10 ) ( MMSTATE_INITIAL -> > MMSTATE_SESSION_DISCONNECTING ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnGameUIActivated( delay = 0 ) > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 10 -> 0 ) ( > MMSTATE_SESSION_DISCONNECTING -> MMSTATE_INITIAL ) > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 0 -> 0 ) (NONE - NONE) > [L4DMM] CMatchGame::RemoveAllPlayers > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 0 -> 0 ) (NONE - NONE) > [L4DMM] CMatchGame::RemoveAllPlayers > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::CloseAllWindows() > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnFrameClosed( 0, 22 ) > [L4DUI] After close all windows: > [L4DUI] OnOpen( `GameLobby`, caller = ``, hidePrev = 0, setActive > = 1, wt=10, wpri=0 ) > [L4DUI] Starting lobby... game slots = 4 > game mode = 0 > public slots = 4 > difficulty = 1 > experience = 0 > skill0 = 0 > skill1 = 0 > skill2 = 0 > skill3 = 0 > skill4 = 0 > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 0 -> 2 ) ( MMSTATE_INITIAL -> > MMSTATE_CREATING ) > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 0 -> 1 ) (NONE - CREATING) > [L4DUI] StartPartyLobby: lobby started = true > [L4DUI] CUIGameData::Notify( SERVERS_USER_GROUPS_SEARCH_COMPLETED, 0, 0) > [L4DMM] CSession::GetSessionId() => sessionid = 184010d6b02a009 > [L4DMM] CSession::UpdateCreating() => sessionid = 184010d6b02a009 > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking(state = 2)::SessionNotification( 17(CREATED_HOST), 0 ) > [L4DUI] CUIGameData::SessionNotification( 17, 0 ) > Host: CreateSession successful > [L4DMM] CMatchGame::AddPlayer( 11100a0df55 ) > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::SwitchToState( 2 -> 4 ) ( MMSTATE_CREATING -> > MMSTATE_ACCEPTING_CONNECTIONS ) > [L4DMM] CSession::SwitchToState( 1 -> 3 ) (CREATING - IDLE) > [L4DMM] Avatar assignment: >Player 1: [[Awesome] ainmosni |BRB.u|]: Louis > [L4DMM] CMatchmaking::ResolveDedicatedAddress(172.29.36.210:27015) > maxplayers set to 14 > [L4DUI] CUIGameData::Notify( DEDICATED_RESERVATION_FAILURE, 0, 0) > [L4DUI] OnOpen( `GenericConfirmation`, caller = `GameLobby`, hidePrev > 0, setActive = 0, wt=13, wpri=1 ) > [L4DUI] GenericConfirmation::SetWindowTitle : > #L4D360UI_MsgBx_ConnectionFailed > [L4DUI] GenericConfirmation::SetMessageText : > #L4D360UI_MsgBx_NoServersFound > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnFrameClosed( 1, 13 ) > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnFrameClosed( 1, 13 ) -> Activated `GameLobby`, > pri=0 > [L4DUI] CL4DBasePanel::OnGameUIActivated( delay = 0 ) > > > One thing that I notice is that it shows its non-routable IP... that's > something it should not do afaik... The weird thing is though when I set > the server to public it gets random lobby people in there within seconds... > > Here is some extra information: > > * The ports are correctly let through, I use a 1:1 NAT from the servers > public IP to its private IP. > * I can't connect to it if I just set a password. > * I can't connect to it if I set it to steamgroup exclusive. > * If I set it to open it gets filled with lobby people within seconds. > * I could connect to the demo server when it was passworded. > * The TF2 server I ran on this machine worked perfectly for many months, > it used the same IP and port. > > Anybody know what the problem could be? > > This is my server config: > > [quote] > hostname "brbuninstalling.com #1: Left4Dea
Re: [hlds] Answers
And for this reason I am running 3 Public Services (all full on startup), and 1 running no-master. This is a DEMO.. i played the demo (i paid the $$ for the game)., we are talking two levels? Lets worry about all the cool features when multiplayer is enabled, and we can have larger then four play slot servers. Lets get some dedicated servers up so people can play the demo! -Original Message- From: "Blood Letter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 11/7/2008 1:45:40 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: [hlds] AnswersThe main thing hurting this demo right now is the lack of stable dedicated servers. I'm sure everyone at Valve is extremely busy right now, but if they want to make a good impression when the demo goes public (Gamestop accepting blank submissions aside...), they need to communicate with server operators. The lobby system is great for finding people to play with. I wish the friends list showed them grouped together when they were in the same lobby. We need to see pings! A ping chart (4x4, or 8x8 for versus) would be nice as well (when in a lobby). These are minor details that can be addressed later The lobby system is horrible for finding a server to play on. If you know of a dedicated server that is stable, or have one that you run, you should be able, as the lobby leader, to join your group to it, add your group to a queue for that server, or give it and other servers you like favorable treatment in the random selection process. We also need to be able to confirm we want to join the selected server. No joining a random server only to be killed by a password prompt. No scraping the bottom of the ping barrel because it was the only server avilable. No joining a random server that has friendly fire modded out (it's only a matter of time) or other things modified without you knowing it. This all needs to be in the standard UI with the standard server configs, not hidden in a console command and requiring server variables to be modified (from default). As it is, people are blindly struggling with server variables and command lines. Is this variable behaving properly? Is it a bug? Is it a demo restriction? Is it the intended behavior of the lobby/matchmaking system? For the purposes of the demo, I'd like to see: An official comment on how to manually join a server (either as an individual, or once you're in a lobby). An official comment on how to set your server up to allow or disallow (allow should be default) manual joining and auto joining. An official comment on how to password your server and prevent it from showing up in the list or being randomly selected. Each of the above has been figured out by people on this list, and I'll be wading through tons of emails this weekend when I set up my server, I'm sure. But this is what needs to be addressed officially now. Stable dedicated servers aren't exactly easy to come by. It really hurts the demo, and it hurts people's perception of the game (as server operators and as players). On a side note - has any tried throwing party mode at this yet? _ Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/119462413/direct/01/ ___ 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] L4D Beta Servers?
Dunno, my 20/20 home connection should be able to handle it, along with my 100/100 @ my office i can put a sv_download server on.. -Original Message- From: "Cc2iscooL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 10/28/2008 7:53:59 PM To: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list" Subject: Re: [hlds] L4D Beta Servers?Not to mention the amount of home connections able to handle 8 players on the Source2 engine is pretty sparse. Arg! wrote: > I really hope its not going to be some kind of p2p style system, will make > for lots of headaches. > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Cc2iscooL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Would be nice, wouldn't it? :) >> >> DontWannaName! wrote: >> >>> If anyone wants to know what im talking about look here: >>> >> http://store.steampowered.com/news/1945/ >> >>> Will Valve give out SRCDS for L4D before the beta or when it comes out so >>> >> we can host servers? Any info or updates on this as its only a week away... >> >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> 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___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] HLDS Consumption
I maintain 8 16 core VMWare ESX Servers with IBM San Volume Controllers. Vmware ESX is ALSO based on Linux, the statement that "XEN" gets you closer to the hardware is no different the VMware ESX.. Honestly? I would not Virtualize a Server just to run multiple copies of SrcDS.. you can run them all on one O/S Installation.. You can have them listen on different IP Addresses, there is no point in splitting each instance up on a seperate "Virtual" machine., becuase then your adding the overhead of each vm's o/s, and the overhead of the host o/s.. and Vmware ESX isn't the cheapest thing either. Avoid GSX.. its for those CFO's who don't want to spend money. Workstation is AWESOME for testing stuff out on your local machine.. (you only limited to your workstation hardware). I would suggest you build a Quad Core Extreme box, 4 gigs of Ram, a small 5 disk SAS Array with an PCI-e Adapter 3805 Sas Controller, Install one copy of CentOS or whateever flavor of Linux. Set on Nic up for Managmenet (SSH connection), and use a second nic to host the games on, (no ssh).. You should also setup a web server for the content downloads (custom maps, etc). I Strongly suggest not wasting time on any virtulazation platform unless your 1) Employer or Someone you know already has a ton of Virtualization Enviroments, and is Offering you a space on there servers. 2) You plan on hosting a ton of servers, and have different people have access to them (which still can be done using 1 machine, no virtual enviroment) Virtualization is Great for any "M$ hosted enviroment" that require mission critical uptime.. if a server fails, you have ZERO headaches when it comes to getting them back on line, you ever do a Bare Metal Restore of a Windows Server? I will see you tommorrow, haha.. With Virtualization, it takes less then 30 minutes to completly build an ESX Server from Scratch.. (Provided you had the hardware).. if already had the hardware, it probably already had a copy of ESX on it, then it takes a mater of seconds to boot your VM Image on the other server, its just a point and click, and online you go.. -Original Message- From: "Never" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 10/9/2008 1:09:33 PM To: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list" Subject: Re: [hlds] HLDS ConsumptionThink that virtualization is one of the most quick growing technology. Also, my provider does not use VMWare... They use XEN, it has a significant difference in performance because it uses a modified linux kernel to work, and it get virtual machines closer to the hardware than any other virtualization system... I will give it a try... They are offering me a free month to test it, and i will choose the most expensive plan, with high CPU priority (Its a powerfull Xeon Quad Core), 2GB ram, 300 GB Monthly transference, 4 Mbit national and 4 Mbit international bandwidth, and 150 GB hard disk that i wont use. If it works i will find some way to pay it... Maybe selling the free disk space to somewone who wants to resell webhosting... I will try to host 4 or 5 gameservers there, if it works fine you will be the first i'll tell :). Anyway, its free for 1 month :D Thanks Germán Midnight escribió: > From the Datacenter's perspective, they generally oversell the hardware > that runs the Virtual (VPS) servers, meaning they do not anticipate each > of those VPS instances to use gobs of CPU as they would if running any > game servers. I have seen several Datacenters that state plainly in > their terms of service that if your VPS is using more than its fair > share of CPU power they will ask you to upgrade to a dedicated box. > Your provider may differ on this but that's a general rule of thumb that > I have seen. You might want to tell them what you will be running on it > and see what they say before going with it and finding out later they > are pulling the plug on your servers. > > While it is possible to run servers on a Vitual machine setup, you will > use more CPU and get less performance out of a VPS. If you think of a > VPS as like 1/2 to 1/3 the power of a low end Celeron dedicated box, > that's probably the amount of load you would want to run on it at > maximum, otherwise you might as well be on a dedicated server. Granted > these VPS's can span multiple high end CPUs but they are not really > intended to utilize them all on a consistent basis. > > I can't talk to Linux VPS's but I once ran 2 VMWare server instances on > Windows. (When UT3 came out it would only install on XP so that is what > we had to use at the time). Each instance of VMWare had one UT3 server > installed with the number of player slots not too large (10-16) and used > about 35% of a Core2 Duo 6600, so you could only really run 2 of them on > that dedicated box. Without VMWare you could run about 10 game servers > on that hardware no problem. (Less if you are talking high FPS servers > such as 500-1000FPS CSS servers.) I really would not recommend that on > a Virtual
Re: [hlds] VMware ESX
I run a Win32 24 Slot TF2 Game on a ESX 3.0.2 Build 62488 Server. Core Server: IBM x3850, 4 Core @ 2.668, 16gb Ram. there is 5 Vm's on this box, of which 2 are game servers, (1 is a test box)., the other 3 boxes are low bandwidth webservers. But I only have a 10mbit Circuit, so, when there is more then 16 users, it gets laggy, but i am not sure if its my Provider, or the limited BW. If you have the HW, just do a dedicated box, the ESX box is great for testing Gameservers on, then copy the config over, or use it for testing. -Original Message- From: "Saint K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 10/3/2008 6:25:41 AM To: "'Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list'" , "'Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [hlds] VMware ESXHi, Is there anyone who has experience with running gameservers on an OS which is installed on top of a VMware ESX install? If so, could you tell something about the performance (loss?) etc. We're thinking of installing VMware ESX on a new machine so we can run win2k3 and Debian etch side by side as some games don't have Linux support straight away, in that case we could fall back on windows if there is no significant performance loss. Cheers, ___ 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] Remote RCON Application?
Thanks all that replied.I will probably use both apps, and since i have the php script, i can probably whip some other stuff up i need too..Again, thanks. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] Remote RCON Application?
I know there is a PHP Script floating around, but more iteresting in small windows client, does anybody know where i can find one? I know someone had posted back in 2006 to this list of a small windows app called "ogsRcon" but, i don't have his email addy.. , i would be more interested in the source. , i run a Windows Box, and Hate RDP's into it to do simple tasks while in game :( Thanks. William Stillwell (CoYoTe99 of GAN)___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] Suggestion: Independant PFF Voicecom channel
I myself, would love a "Team Voice" and "All Talk Voice" seperate of each other, that is my biggest gripe, i love playing tf2, but some love all talk on, and some love it off, i prefer off.. thx. -Original Message- From: "Spencer 'voogru' MacDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent 7/23/2008 11:07:15 AM To: "'Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list'" Subject: Re: [hlds] Suggestion: Independant PFF Voicecom channelPointless, people can still mic-spam without using voice_inputfromfile -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dustin Wyatt Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:59 AM To: Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list Subject: Re: [hlds] Suggestion: Independant PFF Voicecom channel This sounds like an awful lot of work for a very small minority of people. I can honestly say I've NEVER seen (heard?) anyone on my sever trying playing music for a "shared experience". There's already an SM plugin (http://forums.alliedmods.net/showthread.php?t=72227) that blocks use of HLSS and HLDJ (works great!), making this even less of a priority, I'm sure. On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:55 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As you know, a lot of people use the VoiceCom Play-From-File feature > (Heretofore refereed to as "PFF") to do things like play music and > prerecorded sounds with the assistance of tools like HLSS and HLDJ. While > many people find this annoying, others rather enjoy it. Unfortunately for > everybody, the sound files used must be converted to a low-quality wave > file and altered to prevent distortion, and are played back through the > general VoiceCom system. > > My suggestion is actually quite simple and would improve enjoyment for all > players across the board, with the notable exception of people who play > the game for the sake of causing others grief. > > Step 1: Add a second VoiceCom channel. The current voice channel should be > renamed to reflect it's status as a sub-channel, such as "VoxChan", and > this second one should be titled something like "PFFChan". > Step 2: Force any audio that's played from a file to be broadcast over > "PFFChan", and any audio from a system input to be broadcast over > "VoxChan" > Step 3: Allow people to selectively mute entire channels so that they can > (if they so choose) listen exclusively to people talking, to exclusively > file-based content, to everything, or to nothing at all. Allow servers to > block "PFFChan" and/or "VoxChan" via a setting, just as servers can block > VoiceCom now. > Step 4: Add support streaming precompressed files (MP3 and OGG formats > would likely be best), since precompressed files have a much higher > quality to bandwidth ratio. This allows for full-quality sound for far > less bandwidth. (Limiting it to 96kbps would be acceptable) > Step 5: Increase flexibility of sound options to allow players to adjust > the three-way balance between the two channels and the game as they see > fit. > > The following are optional, but recommended: > Option 1: Support for media information (ie: ID3) so that players could be > easily informed as to the source of a file (Via overlay, menu, or HUD > message). > Option 2: Local buffering options to prevent skips, drops, or desychs in > playback. File playback is not as time-sensitive as voice, and so a local > buffer could protect against sudden lagspikes or short periods of lessened > bandwidth. > > Although the ability to manage these files in game would be convenient, > there are actively maintained third-party packages that would be quickly > retrofit for this task. > > Benefits: > > *Easier server administration: Many servers disapprove of PFF, but > encourage the use of VoiceCom. These servers are often faced with > transient players who make use of the PFF feature, often resulting in the > admins being forced to take action against them. Blocking PFFChan on a > server would preemptively stop most such events. > *Increased Difficulty for Griefers: If PFFChan is blocked on a server, > then griefers would need to use either an awkward hardware solution or a > virtual soundcard driver/software package. > *Increased PFF Audio clarity: Currently PFF is limited to 11khz 16bit mono > sound, which quite frankly is horrible. Since compression takes far more > CPU time than decompression, and is by it's very nature a time/memory > trade-off, you can get far better quality for the same bandwidth without > increasing CPU load by simply streaming precompressed audio instead of > compressing streamed audio under heavy CPU load. > *Decreased Bandwidth Consumption: As corollary to the above, the bandwidth > consumption is less per quality for precompressed audio than for real-time > compression. A carefully chosen KBPS limit would allow both vastly > improved quality and reduced bandwidth. > > > Here's a crude flowchart showing the key differences between the current > system and the one I propose: > http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v247/Baikasu/v
Re: [hlds] Memory leaks still after update
I am running two Win2K3 Servers with only beetlesmod, Memory usuage on restart is 54mb.. I don't understand how you have be using 200mb on your server, unless its sourcemod doing it. -Original Message- From: ""[??R] The-/ Sent 7/8/2008 7:33:54 PM To: "Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list" Subject: [hlds] Memory leaks still after updateJust got servers updated vanilla or not they're using ~200MB of ram upon start before players even join... win2k3 box non-vanilla servers running Sourcemod ___ 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
