resses
as well if they CHFL_BAN_IPMASK set. It's a one line change so we'll
probably do it in the qnet ircd anyway.
Comments?
Cheers,
splidge
QuakeNet person
ange is almost certainly being made by some firewall between you and
the IRC server, not by the ircd itself. Linux netfilter, for example, is
capable of rewriting requests such that people behind a NAT firewall can
still use DCC.
Cheers,
splidge
use the login-during-registration, and users that don't want +x put
the login command after registration like they do at the moment.
splidge
QuakeNet person
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 12:14:03AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm assuming this trivial fix will nail it (but haven't tested of course).
Update: tested, applied, deployed.
splidge
QuakeNet person
ned char stat = parc > 1 ? parv[1][0] : '\0';
struct StatDesc *sd;
char *param = 0;
splidge
QuakeNet person
nly done for a local user join then
the other servers don't care. We only noticed this behavour when users
started getting around one particular wildcard BADCHAN of ours (&*).
splidge
QuakeNet person
;& !IsAnOper(sptr)) {
send_reply(sptr, ERR_BANNEDFROMCHAN, name);
continue;
}
...
Now, we're used to being able to use wildcards in BADCHANs, so we're going
to get rid of the GLINE_EXACT flag in there. Just wanted to check that it's
intentional that wildcard BADC
ircd says:
HACK(2): C MODE #twilightzone +o C [989986810]
and sends a mode back the other way deopping the user. Is this expected?
Could the ircd not just convert the CREATE to a JOIN when propogating it and
not send the HACK notice? (it knows that the service hasn't yet acknowledged
the burst)?
splidge
ures is...contra-
> indicated.
But the sheer fun[1] of implementing these features makes them attractive to
contemplate, let alone the fun of actually trying to make any meaningful use
of them..
"OK guys, we're changing NICKLEN! Everyone rehash your servers NOW!"[2]
You sh
out them anyway (they can't
talk or anything, and nick changes etc. would be supressed). Enabling ops
to see all channel members would allow bots to function normally, too.
splidge
g a /names get their
namelist back in sync but I don't think this can be relied upon.
I think if we do implement this feature we need something more along the
lines of what I explained initially (i.e. +v users are visible and can
talk but can't see everyone).
splidge
[1] It spewed some random error at me, so it did know it was broken..
ct, however
forcing PART/JOIN or just broadcasting a new NAMES and expecting the client
to cope is "just a bit" hackish ;).
So, two questions:
(a) Has anyone done this before, if so how did you do it and what happened?
(b) What do you think of the above idea?
Any thoughts appreciated.
Cheers
splidge
12 matches
Mail list logo
