16
Technical Support / Re: New protocol design ideas
« on: July 26, 2008, 23:59:23 »
I agree...
Also, you may want to include masking, maybe 2 32-bit fields for 64-flags that it can be kept simple. The Server list the main page doesn't care for scores and all, maybe send RQ_SERVERNAME and just get the server name back, same can also go for launchers (i.e. partial refresh instead of a full one) then send the mask back of what is actually in that packet data. Can also save some space for useless stuff like in DM who cares for team scores yknow?.
Omission/inclusion of fields based on masks can complicate:
1) We may or may not include a field in the next protocol version (eg included/removed team scores), then we have to say that the flag is available/not
2) If that were the case, we would also have to maintain a list of flags supported for each protocol version in the current minor version we are working with
However, you are right in that it would leave more space for certain game modes to have more information available later on.
It isn't necessarily a bad idea and it can always be added in later on (thanks to versioning)
EDIT: I found an article today which is "similar" to what we are discussing here: http://blogs.msdn.com/johnmil/archive/2006/01/11/511527.aspx