[bf1942] Punkbuster (Was: How could DICE agree to this??)

[Joe]

And per the BBO forums, Kevlar even states it does indeed add overhead. Most
of the overhead info though is a bit dated if I recall correctly. When all
other options have been exhausted (IE server process restart, which restarts
PB) other things need to be checked out. Our problem comes and goes, as you
know Jon, and has nothing to do with PB updates. It will be perfectly fine
for weeks, then suck ass for a week, then be fine again....
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Mario Massa [mailto:Admin at weaklinks.net]
  Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 5:20 PM
  To: bf1942 at icculus.org
  Subject: RE: [bf1942] Punkbuster (Was: How could DICE agree to this??)




  Well it does a bit more then that , breaks up server configuration files
has its own ban list


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

  From: Jon Wolberg [mailto:jon at ecgnetwork.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 4:58 PM
  To: bf1942 at icculus.org
  Subject: Re: [bf1942] Punkbuster (Was: How could DICE agree to this??)



  I really dont know why people blame BBO.  All it *REALLY* does to the
server is connect over and over on the remote console port to get status
updates.



  If that causes lag then the server has other issues.


  Jon

  ----- Original Message -----

    From: Mario Massa

    To: bf1942 at icculus.org

    Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 4:55 PM

    Subject: RE: [bf1942] Punkbuster (Was: How could DICE agree to this??)



    GOING OFF SUBJECT I TOO HAVE A FEW SERVERS AND EVERY USER HAS COMPLAINED
OF
    LAG But it might be cause by BBO if installed if a few of you guys can
get
    in touch with me to get to the bottom line of this lag issues
    Weaklinks at msn.com or http://bf1942.lightcubed.com pm me there called
    Weaklinks


    -----Original Message-----
    From: James Gurney [mailto:james at globalmegacorp.org]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:48 AM
    To: bf1942 at icculus.org
    Subject: [bf1942] Punkbuster (Was: How could DICE agree to this??)

    On 2/22/2005 7:46 PM, Neal Clayton wrote:
    > 2) An improved engine that doesn't suffer horribly from lag caused by
    > punkbuster

    Speaking of which, has anyone else had reports of really bad server lag
    in the last couple of weeks? I'm not talking network latency.. one of
    our players has a network ping of 9ms, so that's not it.. he (as well as
    many others) have complained about the server apparently running
    sluggishly. Server cpu never goes over 40%.. I watched the console and
    the server FPS was high, and utilitization reasonable.. On a whim, I've
    disabled PB and so far, the reports seem to have indicated that the
    problem is solved, although I'm not willing to take this as 100% proof
    yet.. Mmm, 100% proof.. er, anyway, has anyone else seen similar
behaviour?

    James
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://icculus.org/pipermail/bf1942/attachments/20050223/c2a7bf93/attachment.htm>