Author Topic: FS2NetD server  (Read 6545 times)

Zorix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« on: October 08, 2006, 06:02:49 PM »
Hello everyone.

I have been searching for the software that allows places such as Game Warden run an FS2NetD server but I cannot find it.  Is this software freely available?

If it is available, where can I get it?

Thanks guys...

karajorma

  • He is watching YOU
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5268
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2006, 06:18:33 PM »
Why do you need to run an FS2NetD server?

I can understand why you might need to run a standalone server but why would you need to run your own version of the tracker?

Zorix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2006, 06:21:00 PM »
Because depending on a few people running one is not the way to ensure it stays alive.  And I would like to run one on a local lan and maybe host one on the Internet if it works well enough.

Zorix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2006, 07:46:16 PM »
Alright, since this seems to be one big secret that everyone has been avoiding, I think I will share what I have found.

http://alliance.cvs.sourceforge.net/alliance/

You can get the source code to fs2netd from there.  I am currently trying to compile this but everyone else is welcome to do so as well.

I have a feeling this post might get deleted...

MatthewPapa

  • GWBB Admin
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
    • View Profile
    • http://www.game-warden.com/
FS2NetD server
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2006, 08:12:27 PM »
why would we delete it? :wtf:

Zorix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2006, 08:17:38 PM »
Seems like it is some sort of closely guarded secret...

karajorma

  • He is watching YOU
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5268
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2006, 08:55:25 PM »
We're not guarding the 19 month out of date and no doubt incompatible with 3.6.9 code for the original version of FS2NetD if that's what you're thinking :D

The thing is why on Earth should we run a second FS2NetD tracker? The multi community is small as it is. Why would we want to split it in two and confuse people by running a second server?

Zorix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #7 on: October 08, 2006, 09:00:11 PM »
Because having one server means that everyone depends on just one server and one group of people for it to work.  If you guys were to stop providing the service or just vanish, everyone would be out of luck.  Keeping the modified source code to yourselves is just greedy and causes problems because the community cannot help patch current code.

Taristin

  • Rock out! (Cock optional)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1519
    • View Profile
    • http://www.BlueScalie.net
FS2NetD server
« Reply #8 on: October 08, 2006, 09:08:28 PM »
No... having one server ensures that it is current and up to date, not to mention compatible with everyone looking to use it. As well as having a single repository for all of the pilot data.

You come off as some sort of paranoid conspiracy theorist..
This is a signature.

Martellato

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #9 on: October 08, 2006, 09:35:10 PM »
As Zorix said, it's nice to have an alternate, should it be needed.  And the Game Warden FAQ actually suggests that alternate FS2NetD servers are actually welcome:
Quote
Why are you the only ones who can host FS2NetD?

People are constantly asking if they can run their own FS2netD server. I have given over 20 people the .exe, but have heard nothing back from them. No one else seems to know how/wants to run the server. The truth to the matter is: we aren't the only ones who can, its just no one else ever gets around to it.
from http://www.game-warden.com/modules.php?name=FAQ&myfaq=yes&id_cat=1&categories=General+Site+FAQ#5

Though, keep in mind that, as Taristan said, multiple NetD trackers means multiple independent sets of pilot records.  Pilots, points, servers... would all be seperated from one NetD tracker to the next.

FUBAR-BDHR

  • Master Drunk
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
    • http://www.165thbdhr.com
FS2NetD server
« Reply #10 on: October 08, 2006, 09:46:34 PM »
Well I also don't see the point in a second FS2netD server at this point.  Maybe in the future when the code is stable support for mirror sites can be added.  That way there could be at least server list support if the main site is down.
FUBAR

Master Drunk of the 165th Beer Drinking Hell Raisers

taylor

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
    • http://icculus.org/~taylor
FS2NetD server
« Reply #11 on: October 08, 2006, 09:50:59 PM »
Quote from: Zorix;42734
Because having one server means that everyone depends on just one server and one group of people for it to work.  If you guys were to stop providing the service or just vanish, everyone would be out of luck.  Keeping the modified source code to yourselves is just greedy and causes problems because the community cannot help patch current code.


1) You don't need the FS2NetD server software to play over a LAN, it's designed solely for over-the-Internet use.  And spreading the community out over multiple servers will basically destroy the multi community since there aren't enough people playing on the one server that exists now.  Many (well, about 300 or so) are registered to play, but few actually do play with any regularity.

2) The software that you have found is seriously out of data and has largely been rewritten since then.  The current version, while not actually secret, is not available to the general public for sanity reasons.  Given the lack of coder time available to FS2NetD, it's simply easier to deal with a single server source.

3) Multiple people do have the code, and up-to-date copies are kept in various locations so that there should always be someone with the code available if one copy is lost or corrupted.  The community has never helped patch the code (except maybe to screw stuff up), and probably never will, so that argument is not really valid in our experience.

5) There is no point in keeping another server running.  If the one server goes down then we can bring up a temporary one if needed.  An extra server for people to worry about would just be a support headache since the people who maintain the code (ie, me) aren't going to bother to deal with yet another point of failure.  If someone wants to maintain a backup server in case the primary server fails, but not as an alternate server in general, then they should contact either MatthewPapa or myself and we'll try and work with you to set that up.

6) FS2NetD is going to be obsolete when FSO 3.7 comes around anyway.  The original PXO will be back by then, and there will only be most likely be only one of those running at the time due to trademark/copyright issues.

Zorix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
FS2NetD server
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2006, 05:23:22 AM »
The point I was trying to make is that someone else can take over the project if the current developers dont care to work on it anymore.  As for the comment about getting it to the public, a cvs or svn server is not only good for internal developers but for people wishing to check out the code, make changes, and help out the main developers with bugs and features.  What will eventually happen is that the project will get shut down the minute someone asserts their copyright over it and nobody will have the source code to create other forks.

The comment about the LAN is invalid.  I said I would like to test on a LAN but use on an Internet server in the future.

As far as the multiple trackers go, a network of leaf and hub servers could be implemented if it was really necessary.  But the point is to have seperate running servers each with their own stats and databases for whatever personal or public use.  Most people will still go to Game Warden since it will probably remain the largest and the most stable, but if it disappears, all of a sudden its not such a big problem.

Giving the exe out and the source code is two different things.  An exe file is very limited in what you can do to it, you can run a server or not.  Some people are interested in the ability to make changes and improve on someone else's work.  Some just want to see how its written for inspiration.

I'd like the developers to consider how things are done now and ask themselves if its in the best interest of the future of FS2NetD.

Thanks.

taylor

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
    • http://icculus.org/~taylor
FS2NetD server
« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2006, 07:21:30 AM »
Quote from: Zorix;42793
The point I was trying to make is that someone else can take over the project if the current developers dont care to work on it anymore.  As for the comment about getting it to the public, a cvs or svn server is not only good for internal developers but for people wishing to check out the code, make changes, and help out the main developers with bugs and features.  What will eventually happen is that the project will get shut down the minute someone asserts their copyright over it and nobody will have the source code to create other forks.

Of course it will get shut down.  That was always the point.  After the PXO code is finished I don't if everyone including the Pope runs an FS2NetD server.

The code is in CVS, just not a public one.  And asside from myself, no one really seems all that interested in the FS2NetD code.  Hell, even I don't care sqat about it, but it needs to be fixed.  It also needs to be cross-platform and as the developer of choice for such a task it's left to me to do the rewrite of the server code.  The code side is truely a one-man-show, and I don't really care to deal with everyone on this bit of code as well as the other things I deal with for FSO.

FS2NetD needs to work, and it needs to work well.  It doesn't have to be perfect (though it's always rather difficult for me to draw that line) and it doesn't need a lot of developer time.  Like I said, it's got about 6 months of life left, then it's dropped in favor of much better code (PXO).

And this comment, "nobody will have the source code to create other forks", is the main reason that the code isn't publicly available.  There shouldn't be forks.  There shouldn't be multiple versions.  What there should be is one platform to work off of, and for the moment at least, that means one person coding it, one server running it.

Quote from: Zorix;42793
As far as the multiple trackers go, a network of leaf and hub servers could be implemented if it was really necessary.  But the point is to have seperate running servers each with their own stats and databases for whatever personal or public use.  Most people will still go to Game Warden since it will probably remain the largest and the most stable, but if it disappears, all of a sudden its not such a big problem.

That sounds noble, until you put it into the context of this community.  The clans will run their own servers and stop coming to GW to use the primary server.  The server code will be modified to do new things, breaking compatibility with other servers/clients.  The FS2 code base will be modified to work better with the modified servers, thereby breaking compatibility with everything and leading to even more forks of the FS2 code which just get back to SCP for support requests, which we have never wanted to deal with in the first place.  Or, the primary server code gets updated to have new features, FSO gets upgraded to use the new changes, and compatibility breaks for everyone else who doesn't keep up.

What you suggest sounds good in theory, and I would be the first to endorse it.  But the truth is that the real world context of our situation, it just isn't going to work.  There aren't enough people to handle what we already do, and what you suggest only creates problems.

We tried it already.  And we got bitten in the ass.

Quote from: Zorix;42793
Giving the exe out and the source code is two different things.  An exe file is very limited in what you can do to it, you can run a server or not.  Some people are interested in the ability to make changes and improve on someone else's work.  Some just want to see how its written for inspiration.

There is no exe.  The current server code base is Linux (and OS X) only, which means that you'd need the source.  The original Windows code was buggy and Windows doesn't really support the security features that the code now requires.

And even if there was an exe, someone would get support requests for it.  There is no one with the time or energy to handle such a thing.  I'm about the only one that knows the current code, and I am certainly not going to handle support requests for it.

Quote from: Zorix;42793
I'd like the developers to consider how things are done now and ask themselves if its in the best interest of the future of FS2NetD.

With any luck, there will be no future for FS2NetD.  It needs to die, and one day it will.  How things work now has proven to be pretty good for FS2NetD.  Understand that you aren't aware of the all of the previous issues, nor the extent we have gone to in order to resolve those issues.  There is more than one side to this (in numerous ways) so the way it's done now is what we believe is best for the big picture.  It isn't just the fact that GW runs the FS2NetD server, it's that SCP has to maintain and support it.

castor

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
    • http://www.ffighters.co.uk./home/
FS2NetD server
« Reply #14 on: October 09, 2006, 04:15:31 PM »
Oh noes!
The hassle with using different FSO versions is messy enough, adding multiple FS2NETs with different sw versions into this picture would render the whole thing unusable, practically.

Though, having a backup server is a good idea :)
Cheers!