@BaK -- Proxy Chat Server / SubSpace Bouncer

[L.C.]

http://www.hlrse.net/Qwerty/pcs-ssb.png

Forgot to write that there are two modes of functionality:

 

* PCS/SSB would connect and disconnect to zone as you would be connected to PCS/SSB; there would be a "timeout" or latency decision so that if you lost connection for a second or two the PCS/SSB would remain connected. I could set the "timeout" to 5 minutes for example, and if I am not connected to the PCS/SSB for that much time, the PCS/SSB will log off the zone/server it is connected to. (The PCS/SSB will update my chat client with the information I missed when I finally reconnect to the PCS/SSB.)

 

* PCS/SSB would function like an IRC Bouncer in that it always remains connected to the zone/server you have it configured for or connected to. When you exit your chat client and disconnect from your PCS/SSB, PCS/SSB will remain connected in your username on the server. When you reconnect, you will not be updated with all the information you miss, but you have the option to send the PCS/SSB a command to show you the last x number of lines before you connected, or you can look at the logs the PCS/SSB keeps (if you have logging enabled) to see everything you missed. You could also set a "timeout" on this mode, so that if you reconnect before this "timeout" expires, the PCS/SSB will inform you of everything you missed upon reconnect (setting this number too high would result in SPAM, or you could set it to a maximum number of lines -- either way, it's the user's choice and decision).

[Hakaku]

I would say that this is more addressed to server development rather than Discretion as a client (Edit: Oh nvm, we're not in Discretion forum). I'm not sure if you're aware, but ASSS servers allow both UDP and TCP client connections, the latter one being specifically geared towards chat clients. It could easily be possible to either setup an intermediary Proxy server that retains chat information and forwards that information to a chat client upon request, or modify the ASSS module directly to store X amount of lines.

 

All it would require to change in the existing TCP protocol would be to have the chat client forward an optional request upon connecting for either all previous lines, or those starting from the last line that matches a specific string (though the filtering could also be done client-side).

 

For Subgame servers, the only plausible way to do this would be to have a bot logged into the zone storing chat information. An ugly solution, but it works. For ASSS zones that refuse TCP connections, a module could more or less easily be created to do the same thing as the TCP chatnet protocol + storing lines.

[JoWie]

heh that is kinda what i have been using for over a year now, wrote it in perl. Its one on one tho, it does not support multiple players at once.

Also has some preliminary IRC support, you can connect using an irc client instead of a chatnet client. but it has some bugs.

 

use ?bnc to send commands to the bouncer.

modifty the %config hash for configuration

ChatNetBouncer.zip

[Dr Brain]

A chatnet proxy will make it extremely easy to be caught in someone else's ban.

[»Lynx]

As what Dr Brain said - proxies will never work in Subspace due to bans, however I find that I can have the worst connection ever, even completely disconnect and reconnect my ethernet cable and still stay connected with chatnut due to TCP connection. Perhaps you're requesting a proxy that you control yourself, which I think you'd find only a very small amount of the population would ever use.

 

-L

 

(Sorry, I looked at the image after writing this...)

Edited September 26, 2009 by Lynx

[»jabjabjab]

I like the fact that messages are still gotten during packetloss. would save annoyances during meetings etc.

[Dr Brain]

I like the fact that messages are still gotten during packetloss. would save annoyances during meetings etc.

Perhaps you've never noticed that Continuum doesn't lose messages during packetloss either.

[»doc flabby]

Why not just use a standard VPN or SOCKS proxy. You can setup OpenVPN on your server. Or use a 3rd party service (there are many)

 

Or you can use SSH to tunnel Continuum. I've done all of these. A special piece of software isn't needed.

 

TCP is even easier to proxy than UDP pretty much any generic proxy software will work with chatnet.

Edited September 28, 2009 by doc flabby

[Bak]

seems like a tcp proxy. is the benefit that you don't lose the chat after you disconnect?

 

you don't really have to open outgoing ports for servers you connect to, as firewalls do this automatically

[L.C.]

you don't really have to open outgoing ports for servers you connect to, as firewalls do this automatically

At my workplace, we use WatchGuard Firebox with all ports blocked as a default. Only the necessary ports like 80, 21, 110, 25, etc are opened. As a result, every zone in Continuum is "blocked"/offline and I cannot get directory server zone listings.

 

seems like a tcp proxy. is the benefit that you don't lose the chat after you disconnect?

To me, the benefit of an IRC Bouncer was that I could stay connected 24/7, the fact that a dedicated server with a better and more [uptime] reliable internet connection was laboring instead of my computer and internet, and so that I never miss out on anything.

 

For me, it would be easier to directly connect to my own dedicated server than to connect to any other server. My dedicated server would not lose connection (like mine), it would not lose connection very easily (like mine), and it would not be dependent upon how the weather and atmosphere is doing (like mine).

 

Plus, let me mention that it wouldn't just benefit me at the workplace, but at home and at college. I want to make sure that my messages get through. Since I am not always in the same location, the strength and reliability of connectivity in the "default ways" of chatting, I find, are overall poor compared to being directly connected to a dedicated server of my own.

 

Why not just use a standard VPN or SOCKS proxy.

Or you can use SSH to tunnel Continuum.

VPN is out of the question in my situation.

How would you go about doing SOCKS? Assume that SSH [and VPN] ports are always blocked.

 

But all in all, I don't really think anything I say matters. After all, why put forth the effort to satisfy only one user (me)?

 

EDIT :: And technically speaking, I would still have to get a port open to connect to the PCS/SSB, but it would be a lot safer opening a port to that since it specializes in only and strictly in Subspace's protocol (which is pretty secure due to its simplicity and lowness, if you ask me). It might be possible to make a sneaky workaround where port 80 or something is used though.

 

 

 

Anyway, I only wanted to share this idea with the community for the sake of "FYI". Never hurts to share an idea; never know when an idea might be the key to something for someone or whatever.

Edited October 2, 2009 by L.C.

[Dr Brain]

You say that you find the current method to be poor compared to connecting to your own dedicated server. Might I ask how you're doing that? It seems like if you've already got it to a point where you can evaluate it, you don't need us to make you something.

[L.C.]

Dr. Brain, I am sorry to say this, but I really don't care enough to find a solution (I regretfully take back the contents of my previous reply). In my scenario, I do not have the ability to install the additional software required to run Snrrrub's client, and Subchat is too much of an unfinished product (bugs, glitches, connection/chat buffer unreliability, etc). I do not seek to irritate, anger, or stress anyone out.

 

I have to say, I will not contribute any further. The main purpose of my OP was simply to share an idea. In the end, the idea is tossed because it is impractical and a security hazard. End of topic (for me at least); expect no further replies from me.

 

Sorry. :X Just don't worry or stress about anything. Just little ol' retard me posting.

Edited October 3, 2009 by L.C.