|
|
| Author |
Message |
Howard
none
Joined: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 34
|
 Posted: Aug 03, 2004 10:39am Post subject: |
 |
|
| mouselike wrote: |
it does matter in someways as if every network runs unreal + anope + neostats there is no difference in them, which leads me to ask why the existance or why does all these unreal networks exist, why not just a few large ones here and there as there is no difference and all exist with the same similarities and features.
|
There's a difference between running an irc network for the sake of running an irc network, and running a *facility* to let a community do things that they can't normally do without that facility - and the facility just happens to be an irc network.
If you want to define a network's attributes by the code they run, have at it - but it would seem to be a lot more useful to look at who's around and what they're doing. Beyond a threshold of utilty, *that* isn't determined by the code that's being run.
Being small lets you concentrate on serving your community's needs. Trying to be everything to everyone is a good way to punch your ticket to the funny farm, and do it quickly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mouselike
Idler
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 261
|
| Posted: Aug 03, 2004 3:37pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Howard wrote: | | If you want to define a network's attributes by the code they run, have at it - but it would seem to be a lot more useful to look at who's around and what they're doing. Beyond a threshold of utilty, *that* isn't determined by the code that's being run. |
Ok so why did DALnet switch from dreamforge to hybrid, different code etc, but if its not important then i guess they are plain stupid and the change wasnt needed.
Why doesnt Quakenet/undernet/efnet all switch to unreal then if code isnt important? The obvious being the code does matter, if all the major big networks introduced unreal as their ircd it would core more than likely more than its always running, pointless features add to to its likelyhood of crashing, hence why quakenet, undernet, efnet and dal only implant features they need and never what they dont want or just requested.
| Quote: |
Being small lets you concentrate on serving your community's needs. |
So bigger networks dont? If its only small networks that concentrate on the community needs why is it larger networks still exist and continue to grow by the day. Tbh i totally disagree as smaller networks tend to stick around for a few months, switch ircd's a few dozen times along with services packages then wonder off into the darkness as a lost irc network or they just merge whatever lasting servers they got left somewhere else to another network. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
w00t
Eleet
Joined: 09 Jun 2004
Posts: 699
Location: Nowra, Australia
|
| Posted: Aug 03, 2004 6:58pm Post subject: |
|
|
Who cares what software a network runs.
The people make the network.
I've been a part of a continuous small network now for ~3-4 years. Mkay? Don't stereotype please. You have a nasty habit of doing that... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Talrias
Lurker
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
Posts: 163
Location: :noitacoL
|
| Posted: Aug 04, 2004 3:33am Post subject: |
|
|
He said tends.
Also, just because 1 network doesn't end after 6 months or whenever, does not mean that all other networks will also not end after 6 months.
I think you'll find that on average, most (but not all) smallish networks would disappear after 6 months or so.
You're the exception which proves the rule. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DeadNotBuried
none
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 43
|
| Posted: Aug 04, 2004 4:29am Post subject: |
|
|
and not the only exception, i know of quite a large number of small networks that have been around for a number of years.
i've been running a network for a number of years myself, but never felt the need to go advertising it everywhere i can like some others do, should it and others like it not be counted just because they aren't well known and/or spammed everywhere ?
it's mainly those without the commitment to running a network or that start for the wrong reasons that close.
i tend to think of it more of those trying to run networks instead of new networks names starting, time and time again i see the same person starting yet another network and failing. one person starting 15 networks in a year with all failing and closing shouldn't automatically count as 15 different networks, it's usually the same one just with a name change to try to get more users in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouselike
Idler
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 261
|
| Posted: Aug 04, 2004 6:26am Post subject: |
|
|
| w00t wrote: | Who cares what software a network runs.
The people make the network.
I've been a part of a continuous small network now for ~3-4 years. Mkay? Don't stereotype please. You have a nasty habit of doing that... |
Who cares? Well if thats the attitude of a network or server administrator then your network is certinally not one i would want to be around since you obviously don't care about what software is used ... which could be unstable/stable.
Being part of a small network for 3 months or 3 years doesnt make a difference; certinally not to me so please dont stereotype either then 'MKAY?'
I could quite easily say ive been on irc since the dawn of its creation, but that would be utter rubbish... or i could say i was one of the first people to help create the very first ircd, but again its rubbish and doesnt mean anything if i did or didnt nowadays... same as your saying you've been on irc 'X' amount of years.. it means nothing. If you 'OWN' a network in the top 5 then please tell me and I will gladly keep quiet, but otherwise if you don't then your small network is nothing compared to the stability of larger networks require and dont need to worry so much about it.
As for your last remark i am as i said before a very opinionated person, i speak my mind on things and unless i am proven wrong i will make my say. If you dont like it you arnt forced to read my posts nor are you forced to post, but all posts are welcomed and arnt rejected as it helps add to a discussion, good to read n all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
w00t
Eleet
Joined: 09 Jun 2004
Posts: 699
Location: Nowra, Australia
|
| Posted: Aug 05, 2004 5:38pm Post subject: |
|
|
You missed my meaning entirely.
I have seen Unreal running on a large network, and guess what, it handled the load fine. When will people understand that Unreal != DreamForge!
I care about what software is running, to a point. If it runs well and is stable, then I will be ok with it. If I don't like the features or it is unstable (ala Auspice) then I'll hoy it off and try something different. Services here is a great example. I can't find a package that fits my needs, so I start writing my own.
I don't "own" a network in the top five, and I wouldn't hold a lot of store by that, given where most of those users come from.
You are indeed an opinionated person, and I hold no grudge for that. What I do disagree with is your attitude that everyone else is instinctivly wrong for the attitudes and ideals they hold. I don't mind reading your posts at all, it's when you get all fanatical and try shove your thoughts down the throats of others that I start to get a bit edgy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouselike
Idler
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 261
|
| Posted: Aug 06, 2004 4:42pm Post subject: |
|
|
| w00t wrote: | You missed my meaning entirely.
I have seen Unreal running on a large network, and guess what, it handled the load fine. When will people understand that Unreal != DreamForge!
|
Yes i dont doubt unreal holds some large networks, but large networks compared to what, would you compare an unreal based network as a large network to those in the top 10, you could say small-medium networks is more appropriate. But as you quiet nicely pointed out unreal holds nice on 'large' networks which i put to you as small-medium networks. Dreamforge wasnt enough even for dalnet to use hence why they switched to hybrid based ircd in the end. Unreal may hold well on networks upto 10k spread over a majority of servers, but would unreal hold... lets say 5k users each as almost per server does ranked in the top 10, some may have no problems with unreal whilst others do, i done the research by loading the ircd with thousands of clients and found its useage wasnt nice at all, if you feel i am lieing you are quiet welcome todo the same and no doubt you maybe shocked also by the amount it uses on net-rejoins etc.
| Quote: |
I care about what software is running, to a point. If it runs well and is stable, then I will be ok with it. If I don't like the features or it is unstable (ala Auspice) then I'll hoy it off and try something different. Services here is a great example. I can't find a package that fits my needs, so I start writing my own. |
In your previous post you give the impression you dont care... either you do or you dont, cant be both 
| Quote: |
I don't "own" a network in the top five, and I wouldn't hold a lot of store by that, given where most of those users come from. |
Where would that be exactly... efnet, undernet, rizon = warez, quakenet = gamers, each network has its own genre so they attract all different kinds of users, how can that justify any network.
| Quote: |
You are indeed an opinionated person, and I hold no grudge for that. What I do disagree with is your attitude that everyone else is instinctivly wrong for the attitudes and ideals they hold. I don't mind reading your posts at all, it's when you get all fanatical and try shove your thoughts down the throats of others that I start to get a bit edgy. |
I dont intentionally 'try to shove' my thoughts down the throats of others, i do however like to argue, and on doing that i may come over a little to strong, i wont however be made to believe unreal is stable when there is a larger variety of ircd's available out there that is more stable... cutting the line fine if i had to use something like unreal id use ultimate but i belive in using basic packed ircd's like ircu/hybrid for optimal performance which ircds full of features dont give as well.
I have not made anyone out to think they are instinctivly wrong, as i said i like to argue a point to make discussion, if i feel they are wrong i say so otherwise.
If you get edgy by posts you feel are wrong or inapropriate then you have in some sense criticized your self with your own remark in regards to the attitude bit, but i wont get into that as it will start to side track the discussion which is going good so far with each others opinions  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
w00t
Eleet
Joined: 09 Jun 2004
Posts: 699
Location: Nowra, Australia
|
| Posted: Aug 07, 2004 7:32am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh mouselike, your posts are fun to read and even more fun to reply to!
| mouselike wrote: | | Yes i dont doubt unreal holds some large networks, but large networks compared to what, would you compare an unreal based network as a large network to those in the top 10, you could say small-medium networks is more appropriate. But as you quiet nicely pointed out unreal holds nice on 'large' networks which i put to you as small-medium networks. Dreamforge wasnt enough even for dalnet to use hence why they switched to hybrid based ircd in the end. Unreal may hold well on networks upto 10k spread over a majority of servers, but would unreal hold... lets say 5k users each as almost per server does ranked in the top 10, some may have no problems with unreal whilst others do, i done the research by loading the ircd with thousands of clients and found its useage wasnt nice at all, if you feel i am lieing you are quiet welcome todo the same and no doubt you maybe shocked also by the amount it uses on net-rejoins etc. |
Do you mean bandwidth, CPU cycles, RAM... Without knowing what you mean, it's a bit hard to reply to that.
| mouselike wrote: |
In your previous post you give the impression you dont care... either you do or you dont, cant be both |
I do care, to a point. I still maintain that the people make the network, the software is just the icing on the cake.
| mouselike wrote: | | Where would that be exactly... efnet, undernet, rizon = warez, quakenet = gamers, each network has its own genre so they attract all different kinds of users, how can that justify any network. |
To respond to this would be to give my opinion a little too strongly, so I'll just hold back and let your imagination do the work (ie please let this point slide, I don't wish to discuss it in a public forum-- more than willing to via email.)
| mouselike wrote: | | I dont intentionally 'try to shove' my thoughts down the throats of others, i do however like to argue, and on doing that i may come over a little to strong, i wont however be made to believe unreal is stable when there is a larger variety of ircd's available out there that is more stable... cutting the line fine if i had to use something like unreal id use ultimate but i belive in using basic packed ircd's like ircu/hybrid for optimal performance which ircds full of features dont give as well. |
You do come across a bit strong  But you argue well I like talking to ya ;p
| mouselike wrote: | | I have not made anyone out to think they are instinctivly wrong, as i said i like to argue a point to make discussion, if i feel they are wrong i say so otherwise. |
If you learned a bit more diplomacy, I would be scared to argue against you 
| mouselike wrote: | | If you get edgy by posts you feel are wrong or inapropriate then you have in some sense criticized your self with your own remark in regards to the attitude bit, but i wont get into that as it will start to side track the discussion which is going good so far with each others opinions |
I always criticize myself. It is, I feel, the only route to self improvement. Besides that, my low self-esteem and non-existant ego force me to |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouselike
Idler
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 261
|
| Posted: Aug 07, 2004 4:15pm Post subject: |
|
|
| w00t wrote: | | Do you mean bandwidth, CPU cycles, RAM... Without knowing what you mean, it's a bit hard to reply to that. |
Bandwidth was no problem as all servers had a ping of -20ms between each other, though if it were anything like 150ms then i may have become a little more problem.
The noticeable difference was ram more than anything, i cannot elaborate on figures as this was some years ago when the test into unreal was done, what was seen made us change to ircu for them very reasons unreal didnt prove to be as stable as people made it out to be under quite a userload on a net-rejoin with random channels/topics and generated spam constantly over the channels.
If i remember correctly one unreal ircd crashed at 2k users, this was however on a redhat machine .... say no more all others were on slackware/debian.
Unreal core may have changed drematically since i last tried it and may also have overcome some of the ram eating issues that i had, so i will agree to disagree.... some like unreal, i dont, my personal opinion is "less features is better". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Monosex
none
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 14
|
| Posted: Aug 07, 2004 6:20pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mouselike wrote: |
Why doesnt Quakenet/undernet/efnet all switch to unreal then if code isnt important? |
Why should they? They have their own well established IRCds, which are sufficient for them. If not, they're more likely to write a new version, than to use Unrealircd. They only have to suit their own needs, Unreal is not coded for a specific network, it's coded for everyone. That's why it has so many features.
I agree than Unreal prior to version 3.2 was one big mistake. The early beta process for 3.2 wasn't fun either, but it eliminated most of bugs, some parts were rewritted from scratch, some borrowed from hybrid / bahamut, and Unreal matured quite a lot.
I use bahamut and couldn't care less about Unreal, but it's certainly not that bad.
And it makes a little difference what software you run, as long as it's stable. Ordinary users don't even know what an IRCd is. Sometimes they will notice that some specific feature is, or is not available on your network. That's all.
I agree that it's the people (staff and users) who make the network. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Register
Log in
