Re: [hlds_linux] 1.6 Net Code?

2003-09-11 Thread antstrength
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: FW: [hlds_linux] Behind a Firewall

2003-08-30 Thread antstrength
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] Re: At what point is a packet considered lost?

2003-08-30 Thread antstrength
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: [hlds_linux] Writing and executable script that will restart aserver from a w eb page

2003-08-14 Thread antstrength
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?

2003-08-14 Thread antstrength
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: [ot]RE: [hlds_linux] windows vs. linux admins

2003-08-14 Thread antstrength
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] windows vs. linux admins is a lot less relevantthen what you missed...

2003-08-14 Thread antstrength
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: [hlds_linux] Re: P3 550 performing as a 10-user server

2003-08-07 Thread antstrength
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

2003-07-27 Thread antstrength
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] Kernel Fun

2003-07-27 Thread antstrength
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] Setting up a DoD/HL server.

2003-06-18 Thread antstrength
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

2003-06-13 Thread antstrength
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] Server config question

2003-06-13 Thread antstrength
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] VAC, Seriously....

2003-06-12 Thread antstrength
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

2003-06-10 Thread antstrength
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 thought 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


RE: [hlds_linux] Server config question

2003-06-10 Thread antstrength
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