mIRC Home    About    Download    Register    News    Help

Print Thread
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 212
V
Fjord artisan
OP Offline
Fjord artisan
V
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 212
a friend of mine gave the idea of using ziplins (or other compression) with server to client protocol
the idea is that in this way ppl with relative slow connections can still hang up on large chans
I realize that this is an issue that involves both ircd coders and client developers, and also that the idea has some bad aspekts, but what do you think about it?
we decided that only server to client comperssion is needed, one way
in that way can be prevented flood attacks from compressed to non-sompressed clients, and also the output client gives is usually very little in comparison to the trafic he gets
If anyone has opinion state it wink
And another thing, I'm not suggesting that as a feature request, just debating the idea, so please don't came up with stupid arguments like "I don't like it" smile


And all I need now is intellectual intercourse, a soul to dig the hole much deeper
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,127
P
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
P
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,127
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if its "I dont like it" followed by their reasons, and there's nothing "stupid" about that...unless their reason was "cause its january and my dog will eat it". hrmmm.. nope, still not stupid..just pointless.

When an idea is posted here, it invites comment..some of that may be pro, some con, some pointless.


ParaBrat @#mIRCAide DALnet
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,985
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,985
You are right but what I think he means is the usual gutter level replies like "It sucks" then no reason given as to why the idea might be bad. Posts like that are just wasteful even if perfectly within the rules. When I give an idea I don't mind some contructive criticism or even some flack but there are simpltons out there who just object to everything they don't have the talent or resources to suggest or develop and their reply is always "It sucks" and nothing more. I think most here will object to it to at least some degree. I'm not saying that forums shouldn't remain an open dialogue for ideas, but anyone who replies with "it sucks" or "I don't like it" or "get a life" etc providing no supporting debate as to why they are against a proposal will get bagloads of stick from me.

My two bob's worth...

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 27
B
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
B
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 27
hrm, this compression thing on server can increase a lot the load of the server. Even if the compression is light and fast so it take 0.01% in average of the serveur cpu per active connections, considering the hundred of connections to a server, the load could increase by a few percent on big servers.
As far as i know, some ircd use already compression between servers.

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 212
V
Fjord artisan
OP Offline
Fjord artisan
V
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 212
ParaBrat I'm pretty much aware of that, but as I said I'm not looking for approvement or something
I just wanted to discuss the idea, WHIT ARGUMENTS
What's the point of stating "It suck" when you're not willing to say WHY it sucks
Maybe such statement are not pointless when it comes to a proposal for a feature or something, but in this case I'm hoping to get some ideas on interesting subject, and that's all


BeeBeeGun, yes some servers use compression for several years now, as far as I'm aware it's (g)zip
I've always insisted on using new coputers for servers, not just your fahter's 386, althought the load may be huge even on the newest pc's
Maybe someone who runs a server using ziplinks can tell smile
And after all it's just text, a low level compression can be used
And it's not necesseraly every client to use it, it can easily be made switchable or only set by the ircd



And all I need now is intellectual intercourse, a soul to dig the hole much deeper
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 89
N
Babel fish
Offline
Babel fish
N
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 89
2 years ago I suggested the idea of using "on-the-fly" compression between servers to an Undernet IRCop. IRC traffic is highly redundant - they are "Hi"s and "PRIVMSG"s all over, and changing server-to-server protocols doesn't harm clients.

He answered that the bandwidth was not actually an issue, but the CPU load was. So I gave up that idea and found something else to do smile..


Sincerely,
Necroman, #mIRC @ Undernet
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,127
P
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
P
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,127
which is exactly why i said "followed by their reasons" which would hopefully not be pointless ones like in my example.



ParaBrat @#mIRCAide DALnet
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 212
V
Fjord artisan
OP Offline
Fjord artisan
V
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 212
well i beleive nowadays the bandwidth usage is the issue, and connection speed of course
cpu's have grown enormously, but conn. speed are quite the same as they were 2 years ago
well not exactly, but there's no point to compare their growth with cpu's one
I'm pretty sure 2ghz cpu can handle 10000+ lines low level text compressions per second
too bad, my network is a small one and there's no point of doing this, we don't even use compression server-to-server, but maybe someone on largest networks will like the idea if stated again smile
The idea is simple enough tho! smile


And all I need now is intellectual intercourse, a soul to dig the hole much deeper

Link Copied to Clipboard