Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 2025-07-27 16:34 UTC | ![]() |
My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap | Zandronum Issue Support Ranking | Rules | My Account |
View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||||||
ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||||||
0002288 | Zandronum | [All Projects] Suggestion | public | 2015-06-07 21:34 | 2016-04-10 19:18 | ||||||||
Reporter | Watermelon | ||||||||||||
Assigned To | |||||||||||||
Priority | high | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | always | ||||||||
Status | confirmed | Resolution | open | ||||||||||
Platform | OS | OS Version | |||||||||||
Product Version | |||||||||||||
Target Version | Fixed in Version | ||||||||||||
Summary | 0002288: Packet header | ||||||||||||
Description | To use LZ4 we'll need a packet header. Depending on how well this goes, maybe it can even be used for clients? I don't know if we would want to bother having reliable transmission for client pukes (or if we care). | ||||||||||||
Attached Files | |||||||||||||
![]() |
|
Watermelon (developer) 2015-06-07 21:34 |
From previous meetings, was there any discussion on the general protocol/idea behind how this would be done? |
Dusk (developer) 2015-06-08 05:57 |
The point of the packet header was so that it would be protocol-agnostic. Every packet Zandronum would ever use would contain this header, which would detail which protocol it is for and how it is compressed. |
Watermelon (developer) 2015-06-08 14:45 edited on: 2015-06-08 14:50 |
Throwing out some stuff: Header: [0x01] Type: I figure we need Huffman coding since the unreliable stream would mess up LZ4, therefore meaning all unreliable code from server <-> client needs it. * The reason I said this may not be needed now is that if LZ4 works, then the reliable channel should always be LZ4, and the unreliable channel will always have to be Huffman. Body: Reliable: |
Torr Samaho (administrator) 2015-06-08 17:52 |
Here is what I said earlier regarding the header in 0001268:0012193, i.e.Quote from Torr Samaho |
Watermelon (developer) 2015-06-08 18:18 edited on: 2015-06-08 18:53 |
I'm assuming then this is only for the reliable stream, and the unreliable stream will be handled as it currently is? If that's the case, the first 2-3 bits of the first byte could be different kind of compression (in case we find any new ones in the future, but I'm guessing we won't keep finding new ones every year), then the sequence number comes after that. I currently can't think of anything else that would be needed in the header. I figure if we ever decide in the future for something we need to add, the residual bits in the first byte can be used at a later date. Therefore if nothing is to be added, the unused bits should be set to 0 always for now. |
Only registered users can voice their support. Click here to register, or here to log in. | |
Supporters: | AlienOverlord |
Opponents: | No one explicitly opposes this issue yet. |
![]() |
|||
Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
2015-06-07 21:34 | Watermelon | New Issue | |
2015-06-07 21:34 | Watermelon | Status | new => needs review |
2015-06-07 21:34 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0012589 | |
2015-06-07 21:52 | Edward-san | Status | needs review => confirmed |
2015-06-08 05:57 | Dusk | Note Added: 0012590 | |
2015-06-08 14:45 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0012593 | |
2015-06-08 14:48 | Watermelon | Note Edited: 0012593 | View Revisions |
2015-06-08 14:49 | Watermelon | Note Edited: 0012593 | View Revisions |
2015-06-08 14:50 | Watermelon | Note Edited: 0012593 | View Revisions |
2015-06-08 17:52 | Torr Samaho | Note Added: 0012600 | |
2015-06-08 18:18 | Watermelon | Note Added: 0012601 | |
2015-06-08 18:53 | Watermelon | Note Edited: 0012601 | View Revisions |
2016-04-10 19:18 | Torr Samaho | Product Version | 3.0 => |
2016-04-10 19:18 | Torr Samaho | Target Version | 3.0 => |
Copyright © 2000 - 2025 MantisBT Team |