Re: flood nets

[Christophe Kalt <kalt@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jun 18, Andrew Snare wrote:
| Alas many clients are dumb. Of the people I see on regular channels
| that are flooded, not many exit with sendq exceeded.

This confirms one of the reasons that prompted my post.
(There's little use for such a feature, and it'll just
confuse users more, and people will most likely never think
of activating it)

What do stats from the users log show?  On irc.stealth.net,
stats on 379616 entries are:
                 Normal exit - 316454 ( 83.4%)
                 Socket died -  1363 (  0.4%)
                Socket error - 14247 (  3.8%)
             Client flooding - 10756 (  2.8%)
            Active kill line -    39 (  0.0%)
                        Kill -  2463 (  0.6%)
            Allocation error -   166 (  0.0%)
                Ping timeout - 13178 (  3.5%)
         Send queue exceeded - 20950 (  5.5%)

(a significant portion of the 20950 are probably abusers)

| I presume this is where your lists of fludnet bots sent to ircnet
| operlist came from.

yes,

| I think it's a bad idea to use the patch to detect fludnet bots since
| when the protection is activated the victim will no doubt be receiving
| privmsgs/notices from both the flooders and legitimate users/channels
| as a general part of IRC conversing. As such a few ordinary people
| (who are not fludnet bots) will appear on the list of "detected"
| fludnet bots.

statistically not too likely, but nevertheless possible.