> I was doing some work on the addition of metaserver reporting. > The basic plan > is that servers that decide to do so will contact the metaserver > telling it that > they are alive. Then people can just look at the metaserver and see what > servers are out there and which one they want to connect to. > > So the question I have is what information should be reported to the > metaserver. What I have so far: > > hostname of server. Note that the metaserver will determine IP > address on its > own based on where the packet comes from. > > number of active players on server. > > short description/note: Settable by server admin - this is a > brief message of > less than 100 characters that will be reported to the metaserver. > This could be > something like 'latest CVS version. No player killing. located in n. > california'. > > The last time the server has sent a message will be tracked by > the metaserver, > so it will report that information - if the last packet received > was more than a > few hours, you could probably bet that that server is down for > now. But the > main point is that the server doesn't need to report uptime to > the metaserver. Isn't it easier to let the metaserver "ping" the servers all 5-10 minutes? If he don't get x times in a row no contact, the meta drop the server. This makes the list very up to date and the server must report only one time (when he starts) to the meta. > Is there any data I'm missing or other data people think might > be useful? > Since there is already a comment that the server admin can set > up, this would > basically be data that the program has readily available. One > thought I had > would be for the server to send the protocol versions - this > could be used to > get a rough idea of the server version, but I'm not really sure > how useful that > is and if it may be more confusing (what does 1026 mean for example). What also is urgent needed, mainly for new players, is a value for the connection speed - from her client side of course! As i start, i must do some test, which server is playable and which not. To connect from europe to an asian server for example will bring you most times a lag of 300-500 ms, that makes playing very nasty and will put cf to a newbie in a bad mind. So, after a player starts a client, the client must receive the server datas (ip, port, version, etc.) from the meta and then he must show the client connect to the listed servers. Most games i know present a small bar from red to green and poll all servers in the list after one. What is better: Ping the host or implement a special "ping connect" to the server itself? The point for a "ping connect" is, that many cf servers will not run stand alone on their machines, perhaps a normal ping will show a much better connect then the real server has in his task, and a stand alone server on a smaller line will be faster. This should be tested. MichToen