Re: Getting into a crossfire game

["Rupert G. Goldie" <>]

Matt Cortes wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 1995, Arne Wichmann wrote:
> > 
> > Hmmm... wouldn't it be a good thing to have crossfire handle
> > X security?
> 
> I agree.  Its very poor to set it up that why.  COuldn't some automated 
> security be taken on by crossfire itself?  Its a major hole for a popular 
> game.  There is enough holes in unix to worry about already. :>
> While we are on topic, it would be nice to have a group of programmers to 
> make crossfire more user friendly.  I finally managed to get a good game 
> going, already on level 8 in one day.  (Thanks to all those who replied 
> so fast and helped me get it running)  The point is, I had alot of 
> trouble figure out crossfire, and I'm a above/novice programmer as well 
> as a computer consultant/technican.  There are probably lots of other 
> people who would love to play this game but haven't a clue how to compile 
> it, etc.  My suggestion is to first make pre-compiled binaries for Linux 
> and other popular UNIX distros.  It would also be nice to have a easy to 
> use installation program as well as a metacache server as found with the 
> netrek game.  People who have public servers can add themselves to this 
> metacache list and then when someone starts up crossfire with the 
> metacache server, get a point & click listing of all running servers.

Using the client/server is a better way of solving the security problem.
There is no way I would let X traffic through our firewall, but crossfire
protocol traffic I probably would. The client/server approach could also
help solve the complexity problem. Assuming the protocol doesn't change and
there are no major changes such as adding a new stat, the same client 
should be able to work with many versions of the server.

--
Rupert G. Goldie, Research Scientist                
Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute        
/\/\|| Level 6, 171 Latrobe Street, Melbourne, Australia