View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0003701 | unreal | ircd | public | 2008-06-11 06:08 | 2013-01-09 09:59 |
| Reporter | nate | Assigned To | nate | ||
| Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | N/A |
| Status | resolved | Resolution | no change required | ||
| Platform | All supported | OS | All supported | OS Version | All supported |
| Product Version | 3.3-alpha0 | ||||
| Summary | 0003701: Quick re-route/autoconnect controls | ||||
| Description | An idea for the implementation of a reroute {} block object that would basically provide structure for quick re-routing of servers based on the structure given (eg; /reroute EU) and possibly be a more controlled 'autoconnect' for hubs rather than having an autoconnect defined per-link block. An example structure of sorts would be something perhaps like; reroute { route "EU" { server "serv1.de.network.tld"; server "serv3.uk.network.tld"; server "serv4.nl.network.tld"; autoconnects "yes"; }; route "US" { server "serv2.us.network.tld"; server "serv5.ca.network.tld"; autoconnects "no"; }; ); To describe the command down into basics, it would basically take /reroute US, do a squit of all 'server' listed directives, and do /connect commands using the server port remote format (port would be taken from that of which is listed in the proper link {} block for 'server', also noting that there MUST be a link{} block for the servers listed per reroute::route directives listing. the reroute::route::autoconnects would be default 'no'/'off' if not defined. If an item found under reroute::route does not have a link {} block defined to it, it will either be ignored or the whole reoute subdirective of reroute will be ignored for that setting. | ||||
| 3rd party modules | |||||
|
|
Perhaps as an addition, a priority per server in the route sub blocks, could be added. Allowing connecting to hub's based on priority. |
|
|
IMO this is an unncessary feature. Thanks to 3.2.8(?) improved linking, you can just have them (re)connection rapidly to multiple servers, there's no longer a race condition if you connect to two servers at the same time and your net falling apart, like it was a few years ago. Thus, no need for complicated things like this. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | New Issue | |
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | Status | new => assigned |
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | Assigned To | => nate |
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | QA | => No need for QA |
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | U4: Need for upstream patch | => No need for upstream InspIRCd patch |
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | U4: Upstream notification of bug | => Not decided |
| 2008-06-11 06:08 | nate | U4: Contributor working on this | => None |
| 2008-06-11 09:57 | Jobe | Note Added: 0015304 | |
| 2013-01-09 09:59 | syzop | Note Added: 0017308 | |
| 2013-01-09 09:59 | syzop | Status | assigned => resolved |
| 2013-01-09 09:59 | syzop | Resolution | open => no change required |
