--
[ 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
Well if you think about it, having multi IP's bound to the same Network
interface might cause more work for the driver/OS. Your still talking to the
same network card, but now your juggling three IP's and a full set of ports
for each IP. Increassing the management the OS is doing for the Network
i
the servers with same ports seemed to lag and one 66 tic without didnt
- Original Message -
From: "Gary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 r
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
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
There have been many posts about this on the CAL forums. They must know it
only goes up to 90 sec. delay but have never changed the rules. Not sure
why.
On 10/19/05, Drew Hostetler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Both CAL and TWL require a 180 sec
Yea, I saw your response after the fact. go figure.
/p
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Yes I instantly emailed after that response to say I hadn't caught
the '3 ip addresses' part of his original post.
My response to that was 'If they are all sh
Your first step, if you haven't already been there, is to look at
www://support.steampowered.com, they have a dedicated server section and
have excellent support for router setup and configuration.
If you go through all that and still have problems, post here what your
specific issue is and we wil
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Im having a really hard time using HLDS when I have a router and would like
some help if thats not to much to ask for. I would really like clear and
detailed instructions , also listing every step or things I must do to get it
to work. I thank
your right there too oz, i would like to see if i get even better latency
with diff ports
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds] port question
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> Yes I instant
thank you for the input, it reassures me that im still doing ok
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds] port question
> I believe he's saying he does:
> ip1:27015 (game 1)
> ip2:27015 (game 2)
> ip3:27015 (gam
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Yes I instantly emailed after that response to say I hadn't caught the '3 ip
addresses' part of his original post.
My response to that was 'If they are all sharing the same trunk he might want
to try different ports for the heck of it to see if
You don't need to have 3 separate NICs. You can use aliased interfaces just
fine. However the difference being that you could potentially saturate 1 NIC
that way pretty easily...
/p
Quoting Ook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'm assuming you have 3 nics? Each ip address, or I believe more
specifically
I believe he's saying he does:
ip1:27015 (game 1)
ip2:27015 (game 2)
ip3:27015 (game 3)
in which case, that is perfect acceptable. as long as you don't have 2 games
sharing the same port on the same ip, you shouldn't have any problems
(provided
your machine isn't overloaded, heh).
/p
Quotin
Well, I was hoping that something might have been slipped in to prevent bots
form crashing my server with the update last night, but no joy.
Regards,
Bud Ingram
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
h
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
i hope you're kidding...
On 10/20/05, James Tucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've got a 500Mhz pIII running cs:s at 66 ticks, supports up to 20-30
> players (rates dependant) before dropping FPS below the tickrate.
>
> Bots are disabled on t
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
they obviously made 20/20 for a reason - Source can't handle more?
unless you have a wicked server / and want to go about making
de_dust_BIG.bsp :/
On 10/20/05, [xXx] [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> remade maps with more spawn
I've got a 500Mhz pIII running cs:s at 66 ticks, supports up to 20-30
players (rates dependant) before dropping FPS below the tickrate.
Bots are disabled on that box - with good reason.
The kernel timer is actually set on boot however, using TIMERES= boot.ini
option. There is a damn good reason f
thank you, i used abovenormal priority , but managed to stay off of high
- Original Message -
From: "dasjoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 4:43 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds] port question
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> 95 players at 33 ticks
remade maps with more spawn points are sooo lagggy from editing them
- Original Message -
From: "Brian M Frain (eternal)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 2:34 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds] (no subject)
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> I do not w
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
95 players at 33 ticks and 32 at 66 on a 3 ghz xeon? and no lag? impressive
;)
--
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I do not want to re-download all the maps so you can have more spawn points.
It would seem more feasible to get a mapper to remake them for you.
On 10/19/05, [xXx] [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> This is a multi-part message in
21 matches
Mail list logo
