Re: Anti-collide patch

[Matthew Sullivan <mickey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Michal *pht* Svoboda wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999, Piotr Kucharski wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 1999 at 12:48:54AM +0100, Michal *pht* Svoboda wrote:
> > > > > maybe i'm totally wrong but if clientA on server A will get collided by
> > > > > nick change clientC->clientA on server C, and server A will change the
> > > > > nick of it's clientA to clientC, what should go wrong?
> > > > It's not clientC->clientA. It's SOMENICK at C killing SOMENICK at A.
> > > > What do you mean by 'A changing SOMENICK to SOMENICK'?
> > > nah, i meant nick change collision. server A gets ':clientC NICK clientA'
> > > from serverC. so it puts ':clientA NICK clientC'. and collision should be
> > > over..
> >
> > How would you pass it to servers behind A? They already know clientC and
> > clientA. There's no such command as 'SWAP NICK1 NICK2'.
> 
> damn, yeah this is true. it gets messed on the path.. maybe then the nicks
> should have unique id's or something.
> 
> > Apart from that, with such "feature" in the evening you would leave
> > channel with Beeth!chopin@jantar, Vesa!ruokonen@umpahpah, Fusion!fusion@tyrell,
> > syrk!syrk@millennium to see in the morning Beeth!ruokonen@umpahpah,
> > Vesa!fusion@tyrell, Fusion!syrk@millennium and syrk!chopin@jantar or something
> > like that. Multiply it by 30000. Havoc, IMHO.
> 
> well only if you guys go and collide yourselves :)
> 
> > Piotr
> > ps. answer to list, not me privately
> >
> it goes into CC :-)

/me thinks the point was missed.... to quote:

...and we go around, and around, and around, and around, and around....

The point being for every solution, without a major re-write (as is
planned i belive with unique server/nick id's to come ... 2.11?), there
will be a wasy to abuse it, and the olny real solution is remove the lag
& splits... but then is that either possible or a solution (a solution
being something that is possible to acheive)?

Just my 2 pence worth earlier..

Yours

Mickey

PS Sorry if it's isn't very constructive but i think unique ID's are the
solution and the removal of 'Nicks' .. ie each 'nick' is the
"Mickey!mickey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" and if the clients only choose to
display 'Mickey' fine, not a prob, but it will help to ensure that nick
collides are done by users colliding themselves, or hacked servers.  TO
have full nick/hosts will enable things like op'ing in channel by host
not by nick etc, stopping more lagged server hacks etc etc etc....