Re: european servers.. (fwd)

[Christophe Kalt <kalt@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 01, Chris Behrens wrote:
| What we'll be doing on EFNet is TSing the SERVER messages, I believe,
| although, maybe we should just "hold on to" SERVER messages until
| we get a non-SERVER message =) ...and then at that time, send them in
| 1 big lump to the other servers connected to you.  Hmm...I suppose it
| is possible for there to not be a message after 'SERVER' though, if
| there are no clients connected to the server you link in.
| If this idea actually worked, though, you could probably call it
| Server-Delay...thus, it would fit in perfectly with IRCNet ;)

It always amazes me to see what EFnet ppl come up with.  TS
on SERVER messages.. sigh
They should work on finding bugs and problems rather than
hiding them.  Of course, it always looks neat when you hide
what looks dirty.

Anyway, it's quite easy to split the burst in 2 phases, you
don't even really need new commands, but it requires
maintaining a new state for server connections, a state for
which you transmit nothing except SERVER/SQUIT messages.
Then, you'll realize that it slows down the connect burst
phase, which is something that you'd typically want to be
over as soon as possible.

It's not impossible, but for some reason, anything which
requires "big" changes to the protocol seems too painful
lately.  I think it has to do with the fact I now have
little time for ircd, and I've learnt with the 2.9 serie how
hard it is to have several versions of the protocol and
maintain backward compatibility.

I had changed the protocol at some point so that a server
would know when the burst is over and how long it took.  But
because it changed the protocol, it never made it, even tho
it was non destructive and backward compatible.

Christophe