| Author | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| FrOzeN | Re: The BNLS Protocol Spec. Where it has "Message Id's", [quote]... #define BNLS_SERVERLOGONPROOF (0x14) #define BNLS_RESERVED0 (0x15) #define BNLS_RESERVED1 (0x16) #define BNLS_RESERVED2 (0x17) #define BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX (0x18)[/quote] I was just wondering about the Reserved spots. I understand you want them incase for future upgrades you implement for packets in. But why not just have it like, [quote]... #define BNLS_SERVERLOGONPROOF (0x14) #define BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX (0x15) ... if more needed then... #define BNLS_RESERVED0 (0x16) #define BNLS_RESERVED1 (0x17) #define BNLS_RESERVED2 (0x18)[/quote] Is there a particular reason for having BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX as (0x18)? | March 25, 2006, 4:40 AM |
| Quarantine | They're probably super secret ones, but you can think they are reserved ;) | March 25, 2006, 4:44 AM |
| Topaz | They're probably intended to use as some sort of in-between functionality, but hasn't been done yet or notified of to the public. | March 25, 2006, 4:56 AM |
| UserLoser | They're probably something not available to the public, however, working yet outdated since the alpha stage of it's main purpose. Setting BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX to be an already existant message ID would cause massive confusion since your bot most likely won't support both protocols. So in the end, don't worry about them. | March 25, 2006, 7:14 AM |