Anope IRC Services

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: modes condition  (Read 4204 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

madman

  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
modes condition
« on: January 01, 2009, 03:40:28 PM »

Hello and happy new year to all. I dont know if there's another topic for this cause i couldnt find something similar... When you try to give a mode to a user from chanserv or a botserv's bot it doesnt check if the user has already that mode. For example if you use /cs op #channel nick chanserv will give +o even if the user has already that mode. I think there should be a condition to check if the user has already a mode and if not then give it.
Logged

Jobe

  • Contributor
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1023
    • Anope IRC Services
Re: modes condition
« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2009, 04:36:34 PM »

This is intended behaviour on Anope's side in an attempt to save processing time.

In my honest opinion, the IRCd is at fault for sending the mode through as if it was not already set to begin with.
Logged
Your IP: ()
My IRC Status:

Come along and visit http://www.anopequotes.org/

katsklaw

  • Guest
Re: modes condition
« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2009, 05:24:54 AM »

This is intended behaviour on Anope's side in an attempt to save processing time.

In my honest opinion, the IRCd is at fault for sending the mode through as if it was not already set to begin with.

it is also intended behavour on ircds as well as it removes the above mentioned check to conserve CPU cycles.
Logged

ShawnSmith

  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
Re: modes condition
« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2009, 07:11:58 PM »

it is also intended behavour on ircds as well as it removes the above mentioned check to conserve CPU cycles.
I believe the ircds do the check for most modes, but since multiple users can have +v/+h/+o/+a/+q it doesn't bother doing the check for them.
Logged

katsklaw

  • Guest
Re: modes condition
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2009, 07:43:40 PM »

I believe the ircds do the check for most modes, but since multiple users can have +v/+h/+o/+a/+q it doesn't bother doing the check for them.

some do and some dont. Bahamut for example doesn't check any of them. The ircd insures the user is authorized the mode of course but doesn't check if the mode is already set.
Logged

Master

  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 56
Re: modes condition
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2009, 04:27:36 PM »

Although, I kind of wish there was some sort of protection against flooding with this type. With it the way it is, users can simply flood those commands and flood the channel with it.
Logged
Always believe Murphy's Law. If you don't, watch what happens.

casper1256

  • Anope User
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
    • http://www.chatspecial.nl
Re: modes condition
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2009, 10:37:55 AM »

If it happens and flooding seems to be in the rules just /os ignore and in the worst case scenario you could /cs drop it as a lesson.

Although these are 'extreme' solutions, I've never had to use them before under this circumstances and I think it's needless.

Just makes me wonder Malcolm, how many user you have had flooding in that way?
Logged
Network Administrator
ChatSpecial.nl

katsklaw

  • Guest
Re: modes condition
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2009, 01:07:28 AM »

modes are controlled by the IRCd, nothing services can do except react and by then it's too late. Secondly, suspend is a better solution than drop. Third, lets not forget about sendQ/recvQ.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up