| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MIODude Voice
Joined: 09 Oct 2006 Posts: 32
|
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:21 pm Post subject: /CTCP Not Using IRC Vhost, using real Hostmask instead? |
|
|
This is new in 1.6.20... as I never had this issue in 1.6.19
When attempting a dcc chat to the bot, it looks for a matching hostmask, which is the VHOST that the IRC servers have (you know..the vanity names).. but when someone does a /ctcp, it doesn't use the vhost, it uses the true hostmask.. this makes it difficult to admin for those that have dynamic IPs that change daily. It also thinks the person is coming from a telnet, as the ident has telnet in it.
Is this a bug in my settings that I haven't found yet? or.. something other than that? Is there a way to make it so its using the IRC Vhost? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pseudo Halfop
Joined: 23 Nov 2009 Posts: 88 Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
There are two ways to establish DCC chat with the bot: /dcc chat botnick or /ctcp botnick chat. These are different.
/dcc chat bot makes your IRC client open a socket listening for the bot to connect and tells it your IP address and port. If the bot recognizes your IRC hostmask, it will accept the chat and connect to the given address.
/ctcp bot chat, on the other hand, makes your IRC client connect to the bot's telnet port (the one you set in your config). Eggdrop uses a DCC CHAT request to send it to the bot and forgets about it. When the client connects to it, it's like an ordinary telnet connection, so it doesn't matter that your client obtained the address through IRC. This behaviour isn't new, it has always been like this.
If you are unable to set telnet hostmasks for your users, you can turn telnet protection off:
| Code: | | set protect-telnet 0 |
To summarize: /ctcp bot chat is in effect just a way to establish a telnet connection to the bot using an IRC client. Telnet settings apply to it too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MIODude Voice
Joined: 09 Oct 2006 Posts: 32
|
Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the info pseudo (was this in a doc somewhere? I couldn't find it).
So.. i must have had telnet protect setting different and it changed after upgraded to 1.6.20 then I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|