Future multi suggestion

Torrasque · Post by **Torrasque** » 12 Apr 2005, 16:11

A p2p network could be nice to download new map. (You join a party with already 3 personne, and you're the only one wich don't have he map) but anyways a link to a good server with a download manager is still better imo. (you can quietly download the map when nobodie wait for you).

jouninkomiko · Post by **jouninkomiko** » 12 Apr 2005, 17:32

well, the plan right now is to leave the server out of map and unit sharing with the exception of letting people know who has what... it won't be in a first version, but i plan on putting it in at some point

AF · Post by AF » 13 Apr 2005, 00:38

I'm thinking soemthign along the lines of bit torrents for maps.

lmao you guys have taken everything far too seriously.

Perhaps we should implement onion routing and military grade encryption for spring?

jouninkomiko · Post by **jouninkomiko** » 13 Apr 2005, 01:08

if you dont want to be serious, use the off topic discussion.

AF · Post by AF » 13 Apr 2005, 01:25

I originally meant it as a passing comment, And there are varying levels of seriousness. But anyways sorry for the inconvenience

Post by SJ » 13 Apr 2005, 09:04

I actually think a p2p lobby system would be sort of cool. Just to much work to implement for a small (if any) gain.

jouninkomiko · Post by **jouninkomiko** » 13 Apr 2005, 09:39

i still dont see any advantage to it other than file transfer. With the miniscule amount of data plaintext and a few messages require, why bother with p2p?

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 13 Apr 2005, 10:52

jouninkomiko wrote:i still dont see any advantage to it other than file transfer. With the miniscule amount of data plaintext and a few messages require, why bother with p2p?

Well, i can think of one...
The server would be used to provide us with p2p conection-links but if the server went down, all conections already established would be kept alive. All others would not be able to start new ones but the ones that already did, would not lose they're's...
Ideally, all PC's that were conected to the server, would have a list of other PCs in the Internet and even with a server crash, they could be able to start new chat rooms, game rooms, etc. They could even trade lists of other PCs alive in TA-Spring and as such, the TA-Spring network would remain completely alive even though the server was down.

Keep in mind, though, that although i am a networks administrator, i do not have great knowledge of how p2p works in a practical sense...

Post by SJ » 13 Apr 2005, 10:52

To avoid having a single point of failure. (you would only need to have the ip adress of a single node in the network to connect, which could be gotten from a webpage or whatever)

Edit: hm should i use my admin powers to move my post above PauloMorfeos :)

AF · Post by AF » 13 Apr 2005, 11:06

lol, Though try not to use your powers to start censoring my posts again word by word like you used todo ages ago

Yah and maybe if our accounts had profiles and avatars that were stored locally. Besides we have a lot of transfers for files, updates addons maps units etc. Maybe for now a simple program to create and use torrents for these files would be the best option.

jouninkomiko · Post by **jouninkomiko** » 14 Apr 2005, 17:48

sounds like a possibility... im still not sure if the upsides mitigate the downsides. doing such a system would result in a slower rate of transfer as well as a good deal more coding, even though we can guarantee that the system stays up.

Shade · Post by **Shade** » 14 Apr 2005, 19:02

If you guys need a mirror for maps, or a download centre, I'm sure we can help... My company (er, for clarification, that I own, not that I work for) has several servers... We could donate something like 100-200 gigabytes of data.

-Shade

AF · Post by AF » 14 Apr 2005, 20:10

nah for Filetransfers for maps avatars unti setc I think bit torrent for anythign larger than 100kb is goign to be useful. A centralised system like a webserver such as shade suggested would eb useful for the lobby itself and mods and fast distribution but after a few days the bit torrents would eliminate the need for those with the client. I'm sure that someone could easily create a proxy for the client and use that as a gateway to some p2p code, all that'd be elft would eb integrating the client and server into eachover for lobby

Torrasque · Post by **Torrasque** » 15 Apr 2005, 13:16

@AF: But for bittorrent, you need a server with has the file 24h/24 to be sure that the file is always avaible.

AF · Post by AF » 15 Apr 2005, 13:33

I know that, a conventional method would start ti off and as more people get the file the less the laod is on the mains erver, eventually there is little or no need to host it because fo bit torrents.

Shade · Post by **Shade** » 15 Apr 2005, 16:23

Because of the way that BT works, and the classification and potential demand for TA (Spring?), I think that bittorrent is a bad idea to start off... Highly available files would be a upmost need. There are other things to consider as well, like a hosts bandwidth, and file transfer.

Another idea would be to have strategically placed mirrors; for example, IF TA was to become open source (having read the FAQ, I know this hasn't been decided yet) one could host the project on sourceforge. As most of you probably know, sourceforge has mirrors everywhere.... And, of course, it's free.

Just a thought.

AF · Post by AF » 15 Apr 2005, 19:39

And I say Bit torrent is a very good idea cosnidering the SY's already use it. The initial rush to get spring would make bit torrent useless btu after a day ro two bit torrents would eb more effective than the server downlaod with its 150kbps limit, and would provide far faster downlaods and availability. So thats why i said both. Besides teh SY's are very likely to release spring as a torrent file and downlaod with limited downway traffic as they have with the videos

Liam · Post by **Liam** » 16 Apr 2005, 06:12

i think it would be a good idea to be honest, although on a much smaller scale, not like a big database of maps... just if there's 4 people on a server, and 3 of them have the map, them all uploading would be better than just one, you could have list of required files and hashes for them. (which is basically what a .torrent file is, although it has more than one hash depending on the file size and has tracker info and stuff) i don't think a p2p system for actually playing is such a great idea though, it increases the bandwidth for everyone (think of uploading the same thing 3 times instead of just once) and is just basically outdated... it also requires everyone to forward ports for best results, which pretty much kills anyone on a campus connection. i know if some people are on a server and it goes down then that's it... game over, but almost every game does that and it's rarely an issue, perhaps that's where saving games would come in useful, so at least you can continue it... which gives me an idea, you could basically use a demo as save game, so if you ever do plan to implement that... there you go :)

Redfish · Post by **Redfish** » 16 Apr 2005, 12:42

I don't think it'll be a problem using bittorrent. The file is probably <100MB and with superseed it should be 1 hour of uploading on a good con before enough ppl have the files.

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra · Post by **[K.B.] Napalm Cobra** » 17 Apr 2005, 00:10

Last I heard it was under 20megs. But that may have changed lately.

Spring RTS Engine

Future multi suggestion