[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: community server (was: Re: Bit on cheating)

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Gregor Mückl wrote:

> Although the project's functionalilty is not that difficult to implement, the 
> problem I see are the interfaces to the clients. The server's network 
> protocol should be so simple that implementing it in the client is 
> straight-forward (well, I'll still try to develop one or two reference client 
> libraries). So I'm facing a decision here:
> 1. use a custom protocol: might be easier to implement in the client; however, 
> a seperate web interface will be needed for some of the functionality, too. 
> Additionally, a complete server program must be developed that does all thet 
> network traffic (not that easy and may have raise problems with network 
> security). Additionally, this protocol might be blocked by some firewalls.
> 2. use HTTP: this is a tad more difficult to handle on the client and not as 
> flexible as a custom protocol. However, an existing web server and scripting 
> language can be used on the server, making the implementation and 
> installation much easier. And HTTP is not blocked by most firewalls, as well.
> I can't make a decision between these two. Which solution would you prefer?

I can't really vote for the http protocol; No matter what, lots of games 
will require UDP trafic to work on the internet, and there goes the 
firewall argument - and if you want people to use it, the less complexity 
at the client side, the better.

Http seems really simple on the client, when you use wget and perl 
modules, but doing it from c with low overhead, etc, can be a pain, IME.


Mads Bondo Dydensborg.                               madsdyd@challenge.dk
You know you're a Linux geek when...

    You feel the desire to master vi.

                                                - segfault