Anope IRC Services

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Request: ZIP link support  (Read 7514 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TRAiNER4

  • Guest
Request: ZIP link support
« on: February 09, 2006, 10:54:48 PM »

UnrealIRCD 3.2 has support for ZIP links between servers, but I have found that anope doesn't have support for ZIP links. I would like to see support for this in upcoming releases. If it is there, please tell me where it is as I might not be looking close enough x.x
Logged

Trystan Scott Lee

  • Contributor
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 343
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2006, 01:54:00 AM »

Goes along with

http://forum.anope.org/viewthread.php?tid=26

Really no point in compressing the data on a local connection
Logged
my God my tourniquet, return to me salvation

Ex0r

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2006, 12:11:12 AM »

What about for the people who don't run services on a local connection? Server compression is very important on a network, especially a large network that has alot of information being transferred back and forth constantly, like nickname registrations, etc.

Same goes with ssl. All it takes is one bored hacker to rip into an unencrypted packet being sent from the services server to the connected server and bam, all passwords that are sent are retrieved, and etc.

Being a network administrator for over 7 years, I know that it's not good ethics to run an ircd on the same server that is running services. If one goes down they both go down, which isn't cool at all.
Logged

Trystan Scott Lee

  • Contributor
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 343
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2006, 02:03:44 AM »

Personally I would find it foolish then run remotely with a large network. Services takes in a large amount of data and you want to remotely send all this? bad move.. zip link won't fix your issue then and the request would be more towards ssl
Logged
my God my tourniquet, return to me salvation

Ex0r

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2006, 02:22:49 AM »

The whole purpose of ziplinks is to compress the data being sent. Ziplinks will most certainly compress the data before sending it. As I addressed, putting services remotely on a large network is a very smart move, as the larger the network, the more chance of a server or two failing. A network is helpless with a main server AND IRC services down simultaneously.
Logged

katsklaw

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2006, 02:52:39 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by Ex0r
The whole purpose of ziplinks is to compress the data being sent. Ziplinks will most certainly compress the data before sending it. As I addressed, putting services remotely on a large network is a very smart move, as the larger the network, the more chance of a server or two failing. A network is helpless with a main server AND IRC services down simultaneously.


Few hints:

1> ALWAYS have more than 1 hub. Personally I require all servers to be able to be hubs. This allows flexability to re-route any server to any other server, even if the secondary link is inferior to the missing server, it's still linked.

2> I think you fail to see that having services sending ALL trafficout through a physical interface let alone across any network, even zipped, will be greater than having Services on an uncompressed local connection. Thus negating the saved bandwidth from zip and increasing the other resources needed to (un)zip the data in the first place. Localhost/localoop is a software interface and isn't restricted to the specifications of a hardware interface, namely socket speed such as PCI which is only 33Mhz(32bit) 66Mhz(64bit), because localhost software and flows as fast as your PC allows any data(upto 1600Mhz). So by adding ziplinks to data on localhost you're creating a bottleneck and not saving any bandwidth because there is no bandwidth to save.

3> Since Anope doesn't support SSL either, you should link it to localhost so that the servers can send services traffic via service's uplink s2s connection. Effectively broadcasting Services traffic over SSL. This can't be done by connecting Services remotely.

4> Anope allows for multiple RemoteServers so if you only have 1 hub you can have Services link to another server in the event it's primary uplink drops.

5> If services is connected to the ircd on localhost and the ircd uses ziplinks then services data is zipped as well.

6> Nearly every ircd I've seen and especially supported by Anope has server commands to help keep the peace in th event that services drops such as /samode, /sajoin .. etc ... Back in the day  that all we "old school" opers had .. so I refuse to believe that a net is "helpless" without Services. Even on minimal ircds like DreamForge, Bahamut and Solid-ircd.

[Edited on 25-5-2006 by katsklaw]
Logged

Pieter Bootsma

  • Team
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 189
    • http://geniusdex.net/
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2006, 11:40:06 AM »

A very easy solution is setting up a so-called 'serviceshub' on the same machine as services, which is used as a connection point for services, and only links to a main network hub and services. It doesn't cause any real delay in services communication, and yet allowes ziplinks and ssl on the big internet.

Note that when using bahamut 1.8, and setting the servertype to 'serviceshub' instead of 'hub', the ircd will filter certain data not needed for DALnet services, including channel messages. Anope needs this data for BotServ to function properly, so just use a 'hub' as servertype in this case :)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up