You are an unregistered user, you can register here
Navigation

Information

Site

Donations
If you wish to make a donation you can by clicking the image below.


 
Go Back   The Unreal Admins Page > Forums > Unreal Admins > Unreal Tournament > UT Server - Windows Specific

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 5th July, 2003, 11:36 PM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

This is NOT UT2K3. I'm using the UnrealTournament.ini file. This is what I've got so far:
Windows 2000
Hawking PN9249 router
Host is a static IP behind the router, and also an FTP server that WORKS.
Forwarded TCP: 20, 21, 8777, 9777
Forwarded UDP: 7777, 7778, 7779, 7780, 7781, 8777, 9777, 27500, 27900 - all this should be overkill...
[UWeb.WebServer]
bEnabled=True
ListenPort=8080
ServerName=24.25.249.253 (this is my external IP, all you hackers)
[IpServer.UdpServerUplink]
DoUplink=True
UpdateMinutes=1
MasterServerAddress= (I've tried leaving this blank, as well as unreal.epicgames.com, master0.gamespy.com, and master.qtracker.com)
MasterServerPort=27900
Region=0
[UBrowser.UBrowserOpenCW]
OpenHistory[0]=24.25.249.253:7777

I also set the Admin Realm= to match the router hostname in there somewhere.

In the UnrealServer Console, I see UdpServerQuery(crt): Port 7778 successfully bound. I also see port 7779 successfully bound on all three master servers: 27900.
Oh, yeah, the server name is )))))DAD's CTF EXCESSIVE OVERKILL(((((, so please let me know if you see it. I can only see in under the LAN tab. When somebody outside uses "Open Location", and enters the IP, they CAN get in and play, but can't see it in their server browser list. I've tried enabling it as a (virtual) DMZ host, too, but still nothing. When I connect directly to the modem, it DOES show up under UT Servers tab and Excessive Capture the Flag tab (I have the mod loaded on all my clients)

Second question: How would I make it show up under the regular CTF tab, even though it's a CTF-EO game, assuming I can ever get it to advertise at all from behind this router?

Third question: I can't get the remote admin login to AUTHENTICATE from Internet Explorer 6. Login window pops up with the Site: 24.25.249.253 and Realm: is the router hostname, and I can tell it's TRYING, but I eventually get 404: authentication failed, etc...

Once again, FTP works with the NAT on this router, and I can also play Mechwarrior 4 Mercs (WAY too many ports to forward!) when I enable that client into the DMZ. So the router ostensibly works, as far as NAT goes for FTP, and will pass *almost* everything to the DMZ. The server ostensibly works directly to the internet, but not with the router... :wall: PLEASE HELP!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 6th July, 2003, 12:49 AM
Azazel's Avatar
Azazel Azazel is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,408
Default

I see you listed via All Seeing Eye if that helps you any
Thats not a manual IP entry btw thats in the list of all UT servers
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 6th July, 2003, 11:15 AM
elmuerte's Avatar
elmuerte elmuerte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 823
Default

Note: you will usualy not see your server listed in the master server list (ingame) when you are on the same side of the router as the server
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 8th July, 2003, 12:20 AM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

Anybody know why this is? I mean, I CAN see it when there is no router at all, but not with ports forwarded or even with the server in the DMZ.

Update: Somebody actually joined a game while I was playing on it over the weekend. Nasty 230 ping, so he didn't stay long, and unfortunately, I haven't had time to work on redirecting the custom maps yet, so downloading takes forever. I don't know where he saw the server, if it was on ASE or in his UT browser or what.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 8th July, 2003, 06:23 AM
>>-=Z=-<< >>-=Z=-<< is offline
Dominating
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: USA.gif
Posts: 111
Default

If you are behind a router you can't see your server on the internet because you both are using the same external IP address. Others will be able to see it. The 230 ping could have been because the player had a crappy connection. Or it could be because of your router. UT sends a lot of packets through the line and some routers can't handle the amount of traffic that UT sends through it. Also, by connecting through the router yourself you can overload it, depending on the router. One relativley cheap fix for this is to by a 2nd NIC for each computer and connect directly to the server through the second NIC. You will then take yourself out of the router's loop and take some of the burden off of the router.
Just some things to try.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 8th July, 2003, 11:54 PM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

Thanks. Oh, yeah, I was just saying his ping sucked and that's probably why he didn't stay long. He was probably in the midwest somewhere, by the look of it. This server is in Hawaii, after all. I get pretty good pings to San Diego, etc., but any further and I get spikes. I'm running this server specifically due to the LACK of UT CTF EO servers on the west coast. I can only play on an NYC server LATE at night - even with the 6 hour difference. The router is cool. One of the only small routers I've ever seen that has 10/100 WAN. Now the cable modem is still 2M/128K, which is a problem. I might do better with SDSL, but that gets out of hand in price. Bloodsucking ISP's always want to sell an overpriced package deal with a whole bunch of garbage I don't need, though. I just need more upload bandwidth, thank you, and it shouldn't cost triple.
Thanks for the suggestions. I was already considering putting a Cisco 806 on the outside, and this Hawking 10/100 WAN, router/4-port switch on the inside, so the game server can be in a REAL physical DMZ, and not a virtual one, and my internal network would still be switched 100M all the way out to that crap 2M Toshiba modem that Oceanic Cable sticks me with. These little home routers are arguably not even real routers/switches. The internal circuitry is more like a bridge in many cases. (That's another reason why Cisco is god and Proteon is dead, too...)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 28th August, 2003, 07:41 PM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

Look at the Linksys BEFSX41 router...

About $80 in local shops, $50 ish online.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 28th August, 2003, 10:54 PM
DeadMeat DeadMeat is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 275
Default

Hmm, you say you opened up 27900 for UDP, open this one up for TCP as well. I think the initial connection to the master server is actually done via TCP. But keep the UDP port open because there is some traffic there as well.

GL HF
|LCN|DeadMeat
--
Sigh, "she who must be obeyed"'s project list is going to make this a True LABOR day weekend for me...
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 30th August, 2003, 09:57 AM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

THX, DM. No problem to do that. I'm still getting a successfully bound port status message for gamespy, qtracker and epicgames master servers on the console. I just need to know if anybody can see it in the in-game Server Browser list under the UT Servers tab. If so, then I would also LIKE to know if it is showing up under just the CTF tab and/or the CTF-Excessive tab for those with the EO mod tabs.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 1st September, 2003, 12:44 AM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

I've been watching this thread for a bit now, without much to contribute.

Since you're still at it, I thought I'd give you a report on what I'm seeing.

First, your server is appearing in the UT Servers list, but not in the CTF tab. This is understandable because your server reports it's offering "ExcessiveCTFgame" type games. I am unaware of any way to report under the "CTFgame" tab also.

Second, I took the liberty of connecting to your "Admin" port. I got the login dialogue, but did not try to log in. Since you did not list port 8080 among the ports you forwarded, I assume that your machine is still in the DMZ. It did not look quite right for a UT Admin Dialogue... are you sure your Firewall isn't offering a remote interface on port 8080?

Frankly, I'm uncertain what good it is to be behind a firewall, and in a DMZ. Since the traffic is still passing through the firewall, I can't see any performance advantage. And if you're forwarding ports to it as well, then it really makes no sense to me. I think the suggestion to add a nic to your server and give it a public IP is a good one, if you're content to run on a DMZ anyway. This is something I would never do. I guess I'm basically a control freak and want to limit how much of my server is exposed.

I know from experience that some hardware firewalls limit server performance under some circumstances. For example, with Linksys firewall products, I have learned to set the server to a STATIC ip on the LAN, and forward only the ports I plan to use. I disable DHCP whenever possible on the router, and never use the "LOG" feature of the router because of the overhead it incurrs. Even with these restrictions, player's pings gradually begin to rise as more than 10 players are connected.

This tendancy is exacerbated by version 440 which seems to cause more cpu usage in the server too. I hear 451 is even more so.

Finally, many firewalls cannot reference themselves correctly, which is what is happening when you check the master server list from behind the same firewall as your game server. You may have more luck if you try taking the server "out" of the DMZ and running it using only port forwarding. There's a chance it may behave better configured this way.

Oh, one more thing.... you probably already know this, but if you're playing your own server from a machine that is behind the same firewall it is, you should use the server LAN address, not it's public IP. This is particularly so if the firewall in question has trouble referencing itself, as stated above.

I hope this all adds something usefull to the discussion.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Unread 2nd September, 2003, 10:38 AM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

Yes, thanks a lot. If you did this in the last few days, then the server was not in a DMZ, just running with forwarded ports. Yes 8080 was forwarded at the time. I checked my router, and it DOES default to 8080 for remote admin, but it wasn't ENABLED! Nice catch! Anyway, in case of some strange oolie there, I changed that default port number, even though it's still supposedly disabled. I may reflash the firmware on this thing, just in case it's flaking out. I've had a couple of players connect, but apparently they don't wait for the maps to download. I don't have a redirect set up yet, but hey, it's only a 6-player server and I'm doing this to learn.

I do know of Linux servers running the EO mod that also advertise in the regular CTF tab. I'm also aware of the of the stats issue with that. You didn't mention if it would advertise in the ExcessiveCTF tab in clients with the EO mod installed, but then you probably don't have it installed. THANKS AGAIN for mentioning that it is in the main UT Servers tab! That was my major battle! Now, I'd really like to find a way to advertise it under the regular CTF tab, just because that's where everybody that really wants to play CTF looks, especially the EO players that don't have the mod installed locally.

I guess I wasn't completely clear about about using the DMZ. Early on, I tried it in the DMZ to just see if I could get it to advertise. I really don't want to run it that way, and yes, I know that forwarding ports AND being in a DMZ is unnecessarily redundant. The way this router works, it doesn't matter if you leave the forwarded ports configured when you jump into the DMZ, since it's more designed for you to be able to jump in and out of the DMZ fairly easily with any host on the network. However, deleting and re-entering all those ports IS time-consuming. So, I just left them enabled when I was trying the DMZ. What you say about the router/firewall not referencing itself well enough makes a lot of sense.

I'm running it on a static route on the internal network with all the appropriate ports forwarded right now. DHCP is enabled for certain other hosts on this network. Now, this is CALLED a "firewall" router, but I don't really think of Network Address Translation alone as a real firewall anymore. NAT can be hacked, and it has a history of being a little flaky anyway. (I used to run a Coyote linux router with NAT that didn't work worth a damn. Dropped packets all over the place.) Also, I don't run logging on this router, but it is capable of it.

I do have Cisco 2501 here, but I need to learn more about what I'm doing with that, especially about which IOS I should use.

I installed the 440 patch just yesterday, because I started getting hit with the DDOS attacks over the last couple of weeks. I'd come home and see 184 players on a 6-player server. Hmmm, THAT'S WRONG... I only went with 440 because I had also read about the 451 patch being a bit more laggy. I just needed to get rid of the smartass that wants to use my server to attack some IP in Germany. Anyway, I'll worry more about ping and CPU usage when I get some REAL players. This is an ongoing project so I can learn, and I am also in the process of building a REAL full-tower server, with dual procs and the whole smash, that will take over these duties eventually, so I will certainly be getting around to the performance optimization thing soon.

I do know about playing from the LAN address, but somebody remind me once more where I need to go to increase my ping latency internally to offset the "LAN envy".
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 2nd September, 2003, 06:16 PM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

Hi DAD...

Not having a re-direct does discourage a lot of would be players. This is fairly easy to setup, and you should give it a try. If I understood correctly, you have RoadRunner out there in Hawaii, does it include a personal web page? Lots of small servers use the admin's personal web space to hold the redirect files. There are lots of good "how to" articles about setting this up. Give it a go.

Thanks for the info about the EO-CTF and both tabs... I didn't know that could be done. Shoot us an update if you get it. ...and no, I don't have it loaded (not a devoted CTF kinda player) which is why I couldn't provide any feedback there.

I don't know your firewall / router, but I certainly know what's it like to mess with network configurations till I'm blue in the face! It's lots of fun to figure it all out though, and you do learn a lot.

I didn't understand the bit about the "Static Route". I guess I'd have to know more about your network to appreciate this comment. There should only be one DHCP Server on your lan at one time. Clients can usually be configured to use DHCP or not, as long as there is a DHCP server present.

If your router includes a DHCP proxy feature, you can setup your static IP clients to use it as both the "Gateway" and the "DNS Server". This will prevent you having to make a bunch of persistant routes to get things to talk. (Maybe that's what you meant?)

I'm not sure where you'd employ the 2501 at the present. I have a 2516 (I think it's a 2516?) and it has IOS 11? It did everything I needed, but it's mothballed right now. You know Cisco dropped support for it, right? You may want to download all the support data if it's still up on their site. I did, and printed out a bunch of it to have. Real handy. Let me know if you missed this opportunity and we'll work out a way for you to get what I got. Did you also know there's an embedded Linux port for this box?

I'd love to find a firmware and or memory upgrade for it, let me know if you run into one.

DDOS is the latest exploit. I hope this fad dies out soon. Sure is a pain. I hear you can run the ipdrv.dll from 440 without having to run the entire thing. I'm considering doing this, since I like 436 for lots of other reasons. If you try a "Transplant" remember to include the ini settings for the driver as well.

I was interested to see you're considering a dual cpu box. I too thought this would be fun to play with, and did the same about 3 years ago. I chose an IWILL DVD266-R with dual PIII-1ghz cpus. I learned quite a bit doing it. I wish I had done it a month or two later however. By then I would have had the Tualitin capable (Universal Socket-370) version of that motherboard. The one I have works ok though. A word to the wise.... DO NOT USE A STRIPED RAID array. It works well enough, but cuts off any chance I've found of Ghosting the array to a new drive. Bummer. All those good settings down the drain. Have to re-install the OS to upgrade the drive.

Could the latency setting you're looking for be:

[IpDrv.TcpNetDriver]
SimLatency=0

Thanks for the response.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 3rd September, 2003, 08:47 AM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

I was curious about the Hawking line of routers, so I went out and picked one up.

It's a different model than yours... an FR24.

This is a dual WAN port model. The idea is to be able to load share your LAN between 2 different broad band connections.

It's setup so that there doesn't need to be any relationship between the two WANs either. It supports aDSL on one, and CABLE on the other, for example. It allows you to establish rudamentary rules for the sharing too.

It isn't sophistocated enough in the load shareing department yet, but maybe that will come in future firmwares.

Another thing it doesn't support is SMTP Authentication on the emergency email notification output.

Mostly though, I'm writing to share what I've found about latency. The router seems to generate 15-60ms of additional delay! This is quite a range, and way too much in any case. I haven't tuned it up much yet, but this isn't a great thing even right out of the box for a SINGLE PLAYER!

When I saw this I thought I'd pass it along ASAP. You may want to run a "Local Test" of the router like I did. If the numbers can't be improved, I'd recommned another router. I have a use for dual WAN ports, so I don't have many alternatives if I want to keep this feature, but you don't need to put up with this kind of thing. Your router is pretty "Plain Jane" as router configurations go. There are lots of choices open to you.

Like I said earlier, I've used Linksys BEFSR41, BEFVP41 and BEFSX41 variants with great success. I also know people with GNAT-BOX, D-LINK and Linux based firewalls, not to mention software firewalls like ZoneAlarm.

Each has their own advantages and disadvantages. In general the Hardware firewalls are the best price / performance. At the player quantities you're talking about, any of the Linksys routers will perform well. Much better than the results I just got.

I'll continue testing and let you know what else I find.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 4th September, 2003, 12:50 AM
DeadMeat DeadMeat is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 275
Default

If you're looking at Firewalls/Routers you should check out the Leaf/Bering distribution (http://leaf.sourceforge.net/) . This is a boot from a floppy Linux firewall that can be run on old Pentium/486 class machines. It can be configured to have two extranet card (even have a dial-up backup card for times when the cable is down...).

I use and old P133 at my home with no problems (used to use a 486/75 without problems). We run about 100+ people thru one of these at work on a PIII 500 without it breaking a sweat. The Bering distribution has the set up/management down to almost easier than most commercial firewalls.

If you've got some old hardware gathering dust, you can't beat the price too...

GL HF
|LCN|DeadMeat
--
Our server is our home, behave like you're a guest!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 4th September, 2003, 02:02 AM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

I haven't been a happy camper with the Linux firewalls I've tried in the past, but this sounds much better than I've had.

The fact that it's OpenSource is a big boost. I'll give it a serious look-see.

Can you tell me... Have you measured the delays incurred by the firewall when in operation?

I'm curious what your experience is.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 4th September, 2003, 02:55 AM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

I just downloaded a bunch of that Leaf Bering stuff...
There's so much of it, it's gonna take me a couple hours to digest it

(BURRP!)

I think I'll love it... especially in a VM... but it's not for NuBies.

I think for our friend here, something more pedestrian is the thing.

Do you agree?


Thanks again.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 4th September, 2003, 06:59 AM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

Sorry, by "static route" I really meant "static IP". There is a place in this router where you can set up a static routing table, called "static route". That's not where you set up static local IP's though - that has to be done in the DHCP configuration. This router can (currently does) act as the DHCP server for this network, and you can map an IP address to a local MAC address for a local static IP. Here is also where you can specify a primary/secondary DNS server or WINS server, if you wish.
That bit about the router is interesting. I'm not sure what would be a fair test for my router, but in doing tracerts over to servers like UnrealMachine(NYC), etc, I've noticed bad latency on those distant hops, but not on my end. I used to play at Badstreak quite a bit. Never had a ping prob there. That one is in San Diego, I believe. As for internally, I get 0 pings during the game. I asked about the latency because I want to give myself about a 60 latency (ping) or so to make it more fair for the outside players. I read about that somewhere. Plus I've got a friend who's a$$ needs to be recalibrated, and I don't want to give him any excuses. He avgs about 40 on my server, so I don't really think this router has any issues that way. I bought it because it's one of the VERY few that has a 10/100 WAN port. It also supports up to 32 DMZ hosts. If I ever get a different router, I can still use this one elsewhere internally without a 10Mps bottleneck on the WAN port. All the video I transfer around needs that 100 speed. I have two RAIDS, but they are used only for storage and file sharing. The dual-proc server will be using an 18G SCSI-2 hard drive on a separate controller, with three others on the RAID in a stripe set. Probably RAID 0 on that one... My other RAID is five 36.4G SCSI-2 in a 4 drive array with one hot spare. This one is RAID 5, and I'm happy with it, but it's a lot of stuff to only get about 100G out of. I might build a new enclosure, slick it and add two more drives before it's all over, for a 6+1 config. This one is all made from scratch anyway. I made the enclosure rack out of plexiglass, so it's all transparent. Looks pretty wild, anyway, with blue LED fans in it.

Now the linux router I used to use was/is an old Pentium 150MHz with 128M EDO RAM. Two NICs, and a small HDD with Redhat 6.2 on it just for fun, but a hard disk is not needed at all. The router actually lives on a floppy, and it's a Coyote linux thing that you can download the destructions to from the web. You have to make the floppy and configure the NICs via a text menu, and then you can boot the machine from the floppy, and VIOLA! Instant router! Once you get the final settings done and saved, you can take the floppy out and throw it in a drawer, and even log out. It will still be running. Works great until you try to do port forwarding. Just like any linux command line, it takes a LOT of code, and the NAT isn't very reliable. No good for games or file transfers through an instant messenger. Don't know why - it SHOULD work. For just no-nonsense routing and hiding all your ports, it's GREAT. I keep it just for a backup router. What else are you gonna do with an old piece of meat like that? Now if this other linux distro makes for easier port forwarding, well, I got a box on hot standby ready to do just that!

As for IOS's for Cisco, I just happen to have a few IOS's for various routers, but I'll have to check on that one. If you find out exactly what you have or exactly what you want, let me know and it'll be easier to look through all that. I also work with a few CCNA's and a couple of CCNP's who have a lot of Cisco stuff.
__________________
&quot;Gunfighting is one part technique and three parts attitude. It is the man, rather than the gun, that matters.&quot; -Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.(ret.), Founder, IPSC
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Unread 4th September, 2003, 08:30 AM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

Good to hear from you.

I do want to ask a couple new questions, so I'll keep my responses brief.
[list:3913c9fbe4]Roger the Router's Static IP assignment - different kind of feature to always assign a particular MAC address the same pre-determined IP address. Sort of a dynamically assigned static ip! Solves the ip forwarding in a dynamic environment issue.

I have lots of buddies who need their A$$e$ "calibrated" regularly too, so I empathize there.

I guess you never used Ghost or anything like it with all the RAID you do. Cool. You know what your doing there.

I'm not sure why the 100mbit WAN port is important if your servers and you are on the same (LAN) side of the router. Most routers have a 100mbit LAN side nowadays, and very few of us have an ISP link much in excess of 3mbit total so a 10mbit WAN port is usually fine, particularly if it's FDX capable.

Can you explain the topography that you're concerned about 100mbit WAN for? I'd like to understand.

BTW, As I said in an earlier post.. there is a Linksys BEFSX41 with a 10/100 WAN. I've tested it and it introduces minimal delay (sub 10ms RT)
There is also the new NetworkEverywhere (a cheap Linksys) NR041 which has a 10/100 WAN. It's not as sophistocated as either the Hawking or the Linksys, but it's only 40$ in stores, and it's Latency is about the same as the BEFSX.

Links to these are:

http://www.linksys.com/products/prod...9&amp;prid=433

http://www.networkeverywhere.com/products/nr041.asp[/list:u:3913c9fbe4]

All this brings me to my main point. I'm sorry to beat a dead horse somewhat, but router / firewall latencies are added to every client on the WAN side. My concern about the Hawking I tested was the fact that it seemed so high in the "Inbound" direction. Peaks were over 100ms. ( This was confirmed by your experience too ) This indicates that the Stateful Packet Inspection module, as they call it, could use a bit of optimization. I've sent them a support inquiry, but they haven't responded yet. I'd hate to see anyone invest loads of time trying to get a server to perform when the limit was being set behind the scenes by the intervening hardware.

Believe me, I have no stake in any particular router offering. And... I love toys as much as the next guy. But wasted effort can be exasperating, and I hate to see anyone have it needlessly.

Good UT server performance hangs on whether the packets can all be exchanged between all the clients and the server AND get processed before the next tic arrives. At about 50ms intervals, that's not a lot of time. Any imparement in this affects the playability of a server.

You sound like your putting lots of effort into having the horespower available to run a kick ass server. Be sure to evaluate the firewall performance as a part of the overall equation.

I'll get off my soap box now. LOL Sorry.

When I was really trying to figure things out, I used to keep a separate public IP to test from. Doing this really helps, because you get to see both sides of the equation at once. You really get to know what matters.

Do you have access to a packet sniffer?... it's invaluable in visualizing and measuring what's happening.

As for the Cisco options... sounds like you've got lots more resources there than I do. I'll drag out my router and let you know if there's anything you can do for me, thanks a lot.

P.S. - Did you know there's a Linux port for the 2500 series? I haven't used it myself, but it's comforting to know it's out there.

Anyway, thanks for a great discussion.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 5th September, 2003, 09:42 AM
DAD's Avatar
DAD DAD is offline
Forum Newcomer
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Default

Oh, the only thing about the 10/100 WAN just means I could use it internally for a second network/subnet or to make a physical DMZ (with 10/100 access from the LAN side) between it and another router, that's all. I have anywhere from 6 to 10 computers running at any given time, and if I can get ahold of the VMware software I got to play with today, well, I could even have more virtual machines. Right now, the 10/100 WAN doesn't make any difference, because the WAN is connected directly to the internet, where download speeds are limited to about 2Mbps by my ISP. If I ever run a web server I would use a second router and use the topology: Internet-modem-router(10-base WAN)-webserver(DMZ)-router(10/100WAN)-internal 10/100 local network. That way file transfers to the webserver from the internal network would be at 100Mbps.

As for ghost, I have Norton Ghost 2002 and version 7.0, but I don't use them often. Mostly at work. What I really need to be able to do is create the image on a shared network partition from a laptop, but neither of these programs will do that. One of these wants you to make the image THERE (locally) first, and THEN send the image out over the network in a client-server type of relationship. The other one only creates images and ghosts to local partitions or physical drives. With RAID 5, I don't have to worry too much about data loss, but since my UT doesn't run on the RAID, I save copies of my .ini files and packages/skins/mods.

The only latency question I had was about how to add latency to the LAN side clients. Any WAN clients will be always be slower, so I'm trying to level the playing field a bit. I need to just go over to my friends house, commandeer his computer and join my server from there so I can see firsthand how the gameplay/downloads are. Unfortunately, he's gone over to the dark side (UT2003) and I can't get any decent feedback from him anymore. He only runs a non-public UT2003 server and WILL NOT play on other public servers, join a forum or participate in the UT community to learn more. He just annoys me with "will that work in UT2003 too?" questions all the time... :angry2: Hence the need for the a$$ recalibration. He actually believes he's getting better playing against HIS OWN bots all the time. SHEEESH! :sigh:

What packet sniffer would you recommend? I may have it - or at least an older version. I've got so much stuff that I haven't had time to load and try out it isn't even funny. Some linux stuff like that and some for windows. Crackers, sniffers, port scanners, etc. I have a nasty little old laptop with no AV on it for all my "*local* network administration tools" :look:

Back before my friend went to the dark side, we got similar performance from our respective routers when we joined remotely. In fact, mine was maybe a bit better, but then I optimize my netspeed, etc. He has a Netgear RP614, if I remember correctly - the new funky-looking overpriced silver plastic oval-looking thing they make now. (what was so wrong with square blue metal?)

As for Linksys, we've had some issues at work with their 4-port hubs going bad and personally with their wireless routers dropping INCOMING packets - even ICMP packets. This was most noticeable with Instant Messaging programs not being so "instant", and dropping messages in one particular case... Now, to be fair, I don't think Linksys engineers their stuff particularly with a dual-hot shipboard electrical configurations in mind. Electricity on a ship and the single-hot configuration of your home electricity is different. Power strips, UPS, etc. have to be built to different specs to handle shipboard electrical configurations. Most UL-listed components will be fine, but these hubs see continuous service, and suffer every bus shift and spike that comes along. Anyway, none of the other COTS(Commercial Off-The-Shelf) networking components we use seem to have such a high failure rate. Our old Netgear hubs seem to hold up better. (square blue metal , the way God intended) We've never used the regular Linksys ethernet routers, but this is one of the reasons why I initially shied away from their products. Power here in Hawaii is only slightly better than Guam, where they ration electricity. (You only get power if it's your assigned day to have it, or at least it seems that way) Here, I've had some nasty spikes and as much as 4 hours without any power due to "load-shedding" (these morons, in all their environmentally-conscious brilliance, just RAN OUT of electricity...)

This discussion HAS been helpful, and I appreciate all your comments and observations.
__________________
&quot;Gunfighting is one part technique and three parts attitude. It is the man, rather than the gun, that matters.&quot; -Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.(ret.), Founder, IPSC
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 5th September, 2003, 10:23 AM
50BMG's Avatar
50BMG 50BMG is offline
Godlike
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Default

Thanks for clearing up the 100 WAN issue... I was beginning to wonder about my sanity. (Again!)

Sounds like you're as much of an equipment nut as I am!. I have about 9 computers running for various reasons at any given time.

I jumped on your server last night as TestPlayer to look at the net performance... but being on the mainland, it's not real usefull for that. Too much variation in ping and so on. I did notice you were running with a Tic rate of 30. Your server seemed real happy from a cpu load and efficiency standpoint. With rates that high, your network and ISP performance will be more essential. How is RoadRunner in that regard?

I use Ghost 6 and love it. It allows me to go on "Adventures" I wouldn't otherwise dare to. I was disappointed that my Striped Raid couldn't be copied as is. Unfortunately it can't be un-striped either. All I can do is backup the contents of the mounted volume and re-install. I know ghost can serve a lan, but haven't used it that way so wouldn't be aware of it's limitations in that mode. Sounds like you are.

I use an old version of Network Associates NetXray, and their newer offering Sniffer Basic, which isn't as featured, but it's reliable.
I keep them on an old laptop so that I can jack in and monitor traffic anytime things seem amiss.

I can sympathize about hardware failures. I've had a supply brick fail on one of my Linksys boxes, but that's all. They took a while to get their firmware shit together, but they persisted and they have one of the better performance curves of anything in their price class. They must feel as you do about cases... they came out with a metal encased one just recently... the $39 one. I guess Cisco buying their company was evidence they're doing something right.

I'm still looking at the Leaf-Bering stuff DeadMeat pointed me at.

Looks like everything you wanted from this post has worked out. I'll stop using it just to converse.

Happy Fragging!!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:09 AM.


 

All pages are copyright The Unreal Admins Page.
You may not copy any pages without our express permission.