save bandwidth with multicast?

CharlyHRO · Post by **CharlyHRO** » 16 Mar 2006 00:04

What about changing transmissions from unicast (one stream of data per client) to multicast (only one stream of data not depending on number of clients). So I think just need 1/9 or 1/8 of bandwidth and hosting a server is even possible if you only have a modem line. Or is the amount of work way to much to try it?

pshemko · Post by **pshemko** » 16 Mar 2006 05:12

The problem is that all routers on the way between the server and the client have to support multicast and that's not always the case. The other problem is casued by the way multcast works - one way, so it's unreliable, as the server wouldn't be able to tell if the data it send got anywhere (and where to). And if you want to keep another communication channel just for the confirmations (and this has to be unicast) it's simply not worth the work required to make it work.

Post by **TrueBrain** » 16 Mar 2006 10:31

An other problem is, we use TCP here. Multicast is more for UDP games. We need TCP because we need to be sure client and server are in sync at all times (long story, don't ask).

Above that, the bandwidth usage is very low (just 2 kbyte/sec per client). Most other games use around 10 times as much. So I think we have nothing to complain

CharlyHRO · Post by **CharlyHRO** » 16 Mar 2006 14:46

Well, I don't need to ask why server and client have to be in sync. I know this fact. And I just asked for multicast because me is sometimes bound to a POTS*-line with about 42kBit/sec down and at max 33.6kBit/sec up. But when multicast isn't possible then I just have to miss that multiplayer advantage on my own server when I'm not at home...

I think the thread can be closed now...

*POTS = plain old telephone service

Post by **TrueBrain** » 16 Mar 2006 21:16

You maybe can't host a server, hosting a server on a dail-up is a bad idea anyway

, but you can always join a server. It should be easy possible, even for 28k8 users.. anyway, that was the intention while designing the protocol

Syranide · Post by **Syranide** » 19 Mar 2006 12:19

CharlyHRO wrote:Well, I don't need to ask why server and client have to be in sync. I know this fact. And I just asked for multicast because me is sometimes bound to a POTS*-line with about 42kBit/sec down and at max 33.6kBit/sec up. But when multicast isn't possible then I just have to miss that multiplayer advantage on my own server when I'm not at home...

I think the thread can be closed now...

*POTS = plain old telephone service

Aren't you always connected at home?
If so you could just join your own server and remote the console and it should work just as good, if it is always connected that is.

CharlyHRO · Post by **CharlyHRO** » 19 Mar 2006 13:19

Hm, ok. I didn't think that way

But this would to open a server every time I leave home and go somewhere else. And maybe there are a lot of days at wich I don't have time or mood to play multiplayer. Or even noone calls me and asks "wanna play?".

Syranide · Post by **Syranide** » 19 Mar 2006 13:33

Hehe well of course, if you have a computer always running then you could probably have it dedicated all the time or use some script to start it up (and just have it locked when not playing).

But, of course, if you aren't connected with a computer around the clock then the it is another situation.

gigajum · Post by **gigajum** » 20 Mar 2006 10:04

Well you could use VNC (i prefer UltraVNC) to manage a windows box if your not in front of it. But VNC is bandwith hungry even with "slow connection" settings

If you use linux you should know how to handle this (i only say SSH). So you can start or stop the OpenTTD server if you aren't at home. Turning on your Computer if your not at home is a problem

but there are still solutions for this problem. The easiest may be call someone who is at home and tell to turn on your PC

CharlyHRO · Post by **CharlyHRO** » 20 Mar 2006 14:44

I'm already using Remote Administrator http://www.radmin.com but with the slow download of the POTS line you have to wait "forever" when you have fullscreen changes...

thorkia · Post by **thorkia** » 21 Mar 2006 13:07

Well, you use your remote admin to start the game server, and then connect to it from the PC you are on at the time. Then when you are done, you can use remote admin to stop the game until the next time you are ready to play

Thief^ · Post by **Thief^** » 06 Apr 2006 00:06

I assume there's some reason why people recommend vnc and so on instead of window's built-in* Remote Desktop functions? I mean vnc is fine for linux because it's fully integrated into the login and desktop system, but on windows it's not...

Did you know that XP Pro even has a telnet service? (No SSH though unfortunately)

*= XP Pro and above only to be the remote server, but any version of windows can connect as the client

gigajum · Post by **gigajum** » 06 Apr 2006 04:40

Thief^ wrote:I assume there's some reason why people recommend vnc and so on instead of window's built-in* Remote Desktop functions? I mean vnc is fine for linux because it's fully integrated into the login and desktop system, but on windows it's not...

Did you know that XP Pro even has a telnet service? (No SSH though unfortunately)

*= XP Pro and above only to be the remote server, but any version of windows can connect as the client

first of all it's offtopic ....

VNC can be integrated as service, so it starts befor a login screen too. On linux you can login on X11 sessions over network, as far as i know, but i never used linux that way, may be i should really get away from Windows and discover it myself. For me, i prefer opensource to M$ crap, that's why i use VNC. You can put all crap into one application, but if one piece fails, the whole application fails (may be not all, but M$ do usually).

Telnet on Windows <- LOL?
Windows get's more and more GUI based, and not command line based so that you cannot use command line interface ever. And btw telnet looks not save to me.

At last: This sounds like Windows Terminal Server, which is also available on Win NT and Win 2K. Every Windows version is able to use a Terminal Server, and work on that machine, instead of the own. it's not really a remote admin tool.

CharlyHRO · Post by **CharlyHRO** » 06 Apr 2006 06:19

gigajum wrote:...

VNC can be integrated as service, so it starts befor a login screen too. ...

same for Remote Administrator, but only for the NT-based systems (not sure with NT 3.xx). <edit> And Remote Administrator uses a better compression algorithm for the image data, than the Windows Remotedesktop.</edit>

Thief^ · Post by **Thief^** » 06 Apr 2006 18:22

gigajum wrote:VNC can be integrated as service, so it starts before a login screen too.

Yeah, but can you log in via VNC to a different account to the local login? Or even log in multiple times with VNC and not end up arguing over the mouse cursor. I'm refering to on windows of course, the linux version is fine.

gigajum wrote:At last: This sounds like Windows Terminal Server, which is also available on Win NT and Win 2K. Every Windows version is able to use a Terminal Server, and work on that machine, instead of the own. it's not really a remote admin tool.

The windows server version is called Terminal server, and allows multiple logins by the same user, and if you originally logged in locally and then log in remotely the remote connection gets a new session. i.e. it's a remote terminal tool.

The XP version is called remote desktop, and only allows one login by a user at a time, if you are logged in locally and log in remotely you interupt the local session and the currently running programs and display are redirected to the remote session. i.e. it's a remote login tool.

Either one can be used for remote administration. I use it all the time for retrieving files from my pc when I forget to take them to uni. EDIT: that wasn't an exmple of remote admin, try this: we've used it for installing new versions of mani on my cs server, and that is definitely remote administration.

Transport Tycoon Forums

save bandwidth with multicast?

save bandwidth with multicast?

Who is online