[quote]'=======================================

Message ID: 'To be decided, Curently 0xFF
Message Name: BNLS_SERVERMESSAGE
Direction: S->C
Format:
DWORD: Number of enteries 'was Type.
STRING[]: Message.

Remarks:  This packet is simply used to allow the host of the server a way to provide information to the users of his/her server. Main reason for implamenting this is to allow the host to notify the users of upcoming downtimes, and matanance. This is sent upon connection to the server.
[s]Curent types:
0x00: News.
0x01: Other Info.
(need more Ideas)[/s]

'=======================================

Message ID: 'To be decided, Curently 0xFF
Message Name: BNLS_SERVERMESSAGE
Direction: C->S
Format:
  [Blank]
  [s]DWORD: Type.[/s]

Remarks: Sent to request a server message.
[s]Current type:
0x00: News.
(need more Ideas)[/s]

'==================================

Packet ID: 'To be decided, Currently 0xFE
Packet Name: BNLS_ServerVer
Direction: S->C
Contents:
    DWORD: Current Server version.
    String: Server type*
    BOOL: Requires account authorization.
   
Reamarks: This is simply to notify what version of the Server the user is connected to. And the type of server. Current types are JBLS and BNLS. Also used to tell the client if valid Bot ID's are needed to use the server.

'========================================

Packet ID: 'To be decided, Currently 0xFE
Packet Name: BNLS_ServerVer
Direction: C->S
Contents:
    [Blank]
   
Reamarks: This is sent to request BNLS_ServerVer

'==================================

[s]Packet ID: 'To be decided, None currently.
Packet Name: Hdx_Testing
Direction: S<->C
Format:
Void: Information*

Remarks: This is simply a official packet that I can use to test anything that I want to send out. I would like 1 or 2 of these set aside, and basically any client simply ignore these.[/s]
Request withdrawn. If you see unknown packets, don't freak out, there prolly jsut testing ones.

'===================================[/quote]

To stop from the last feasco. These are my Ideas. All ID#'s can be agreeded upon. Please don't bit my head off :P And from now on i'll present my ideas like this.

Also, I added a way for my server to connect to a diffrent server, requet News, save it, and then use it with it's own news.
~-~(HDX)~-~

Edit: Changed String to String[], Just makes more sence.

[quote author=HdxBmx27 link=topic=11660.msg113264#msg113264 date=1116712314]Also, I added a way for my server to connect to a diffrent server, requet News, save it, and then use it with it's own news.[/quote]A simple (and I think the best) way to do so would be to have inter-server communications require the use of the BNLS_AUTHORIZE packet sequence. Then, if the account has authority to present its own news, it can do so. Then anyone with authorization can present news, including other servers. This would also allow other servers to forward requests (and of course, sort out the results via cookies that are now in the most important packets... and cache the results of packets that don't yet have cookies) if they become bogged down.

I don't think these work, are you sure they're for BNLS?

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=11660.msg113275#msg113275 date=1116716835]
I don't think these work, are you sure they're for BNLS?
[/quote]

Can you read?  I believe these are proposals.

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=11660.msg113275#msg113275 date=1116716835]
I don't think these work, are you sure they're for BNLS?
[/quote]

[quote author=HdxBmx27]These are my Ideas.[/quote]

I've added them to my server, I'm just waiting for people here to catch up with me :/ So that I can finalize them on my server.
~-~(HDX)~-~

[quote author=HdxBmx27 link=topic=11660.msg113291#msg113291 date=1116722015]
I've added them to my server, I'm just waiting for people here to catch up with me :/ So that I can finalize them on my server.
~-~(HDX)~-~
[/quote]

Your server isn't BNLS

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=11660.msg113290#msg113290 date=1116721773]
How can they be for something, if it doesn't exist?  [/quote]

BNLS exists, last I checked.

If you're referring to the new packets as what doesn't exist, that's why you make a suggestion or proposal.  Quit being a dumbass.

I don't think these packets are good ideas.  Recieving news for upcoming downtimes when you connect isn't very effective because, for instance, my current chat bot has been connected to bnet for 21 days now.  This means that unless they announced downtime 22 days ago (and I somehow remember it now), the information wouldn't ever get to me.

The packet to declare whether the server is BNLS or JBLS seems useless.  I don't see why BNLS authors would ever implement this.

The personal testing packet thing sounds like it has no place on BNLS and, thusly, has no reason to be here.

As proposed:
- The news packet is requested by the user, not sent at logon
- JBLS does NOT implement all of the BNLS functionality, which is why bots like SphtBot do not work with it.  Determining the server's implementation would allow for bots to connect, or to connect and do all the fancy stuff BNLS allows.
- Downtime doesn't usually last 21 days :X
- Personal testing doesn't belong, I agree with that.

Even though most of these won't ever be implemented why not have just one packet with a bunch of subcommands?

I agree, a personal testing message is not necessary. Test messages shouldn't survive in production versions.

The news thing seems nice enough to me. News can be useful - Myndfyre presents a scenario where it wouldn't help, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any scenarios where it would. I don't think it needs a type field though - a simple string is sufficient. Perhaps it might be nice to have multiple news entries in one message with a count field at the beginning.

Ok well no type field.. Sounds good enough. I jsut added that so maby there could be like an emergancy type :/ but that could be salved just by saying the message is urgent.

As for the testing, I simply requested those because I didn't want people freaking out when they saw a new packet w/ no idea what it does.

As for the server type, and ver. I beleave this is necessarry, untill we find a way for both to be updated together. Because JBLS is missing a few of the public functionalitys of the original BNLS, Witch I'm in the progess of testing, and adding.

Noone has proposed and ID#'s yet :/ So 0xFE, & 0xFF are the current one I use, so don't freak out if you get thim, Also 0xFD witch is only sent upon request (it's one that i'm working on adding because BNLS already has it)
~-~(HDX)~-~

I'm not sure that those IDs are sensible. Someone might want to use the high bit to indicate something one day. It would be better to assign IDs sequentially.

What does Kp think, I wonder? :)

I know there not pratical, Thats why I made this thread. So we could agree upon an ID#. Notice how none are official yet. I was asking Kp and the others what ones I should use :/
~-~(HDX)~-~

Disregarding previous posts [of mine], I think an optionally requested news message and possibly a value set somewhere to indicate whether or not the server requires authorization is a good idea.  The latter sounds like a good thing to have on emulation servers.

My point exactly!

With these new additions, a few more packets could turn BNLS/JBLS into connection assisting servers as well as psuedo-botnet servers, so let's not get carried away, ok?

[quote author=UserLoser link=topic=11660.msg113292#msg113292 date=1116722047]
[quote author=HdxBmx27 link=topic=11660.msg113291#msg113291 date=1116722015]
I've added them to my server, I'm just waiting for people here to catch up with me :/ So that I can finalize them on my server.
~-~(HDX)~-~
[/quote]

Your server isn't BNLS
[/quote]Just for the sake of argument, BNLS isn't so much a server as it is a protocol, being that there's at least one popular (mostly) compatible knock-off, and I've heard rumors of at least two others. With that in mind, a protocol should be able to be changed, otherwise you'll simply end up with one of two things:
1) Nonstandard implementations (eugh)
2) Duplicated work on separate project(s) (also eugh)

Sorry to bump this, But I still need someone who actually has a say in it to propose valid ID#s for these..
~-~(HDX)~-~

Isnt it your server? Why not make them up yourself?

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=11660.msg113384#msg113384 date=1116784562]
I'm not sure that those IDs are sensible. Someone might want to use the high bit to indicate something one day. It would be better to assign IDs sequentially.

What does Kp think, I wonder? :)
[/quote]

Someone might want to use low bits to indicate something one day too...isn't that what the headers are for?

Even still, I still think we should go sequentially.

[quote author=warz link=topic=11660.msg114122#msg114122 date=1117410179]
Isnt it your server? Why not make them up yourself?
[/quote]
He already has. He just wants everybody else to agree upon them.

[quote author=Hdx]Main reason for implamenting this is to allow the host to notify the users of upcoming downtimes, and matanance. This is sent upon connection to the server.[/quote]
Haha. You spelled maintenance wrong.

[quote author=raylu link=topic=11660.msg114387#msg114387 date=1117637707]
[quote author=Hdx]Main reason for implamenting this is to allow the host to notify the users of upcoming downtimes, and matanance. This is sent upon connection to the server.[/quote]
Haha. You spelled maintenance wrong.
[/quote]
Ray, you an ass.
You know I can't spell very well. Nither can I make somethign that grmatically correct often.
Anyways, KP where are yous?
~-~(HDX)~-~