Teeworlds - general

Teeworlds

discord.gg/teeworlds / general

Teeworlds Discord Server.

Between 2020-06-28 00:00:00Z and 2020-06-29 00:00:00Z

rj

So is it normal for there to be 0 servers in the Teeworlds category? Only see any in the ~~App~~ All category (edited)

no

04:16

check ur filter settings

~~Fresh install. Haven't played in years.~~ Fixed by wiping the configs folder (edited)

I have some servers in a datacenter that are not using their full potential and I would like to offer them for use as Teeworlds servers for someone who wants a server of their own. With my servers you will get the best performance and reliability compared to a server in your home, and lots more bandwidth than you are likely to ever use

The difference between this and my commercial servers is that these free server will also be used for hosting a BBS or MUD for another user. If you are interested just go to https://TeeWorldFans.GamePlayer.club/HostSplash and choose the default plan and use "offline" payment method so you don't have to pay. I will get back to you shortly with your server info. Here's to Teeworlds fans!

40 gbits in?

07:23

how lol

07:23

@MarisaG are there tw servers currently up using this plan?

@noby click proceed to main website

07:40

there is a list i saw

I'd guess 40gbps shared between all servers

08:03

Or sign me up, I'll just resell the bandwidth

there are only two srvs on list

08:05

so twenty gbits per srv, still insane

Maybe 40g for his entire set of servers in that datacenter? Or maybe 40g for the entire datacenter?

08:11

I've been looking for a dedicated 10g line for ddnet for a while now and those things are not coming cheaper then 1k€ a month

yeaah thats why i wondered

Hiya @noby Yes I run several of my own.

09:26

The bandwidth I say is not shared between servers

09:26

Each server gets its own alotment

09:27

Obviously things like the muds or bbs's on that server share the bandwidth for that server, but they are not very resource-intensive

09:27

And im offering for free so you can always try it out

it must be super mod to take that offer

09:37

like 128 ppl with 0.6/0.7 compatible

Not sure, I have only played a couple games. Might not support 128, no idea

09:38

My hobby is offering game servers

how do u allow 40gbits down for so cheap?

That is just what the hosting company linode offers

09:39

They do have a $5 plan, but it is not as good, obviously

im curious what a speedtest from one of these connections looks like

You can try one of mine and see it

xd

i would be interested to know as well

try it lol

I wouldnt know how to test it

09:42

I've played on it, and never saw any issue, but I live near the datacenter it was on

09:42

There are like 10 different datacenters to choose from

https://github.com/sivel/speedtest-cli

sivel/speedtest-cli

Command line interface for testing internet bandwidth using speedtest.net - sivel/speedtest-cli

Hmm, let me see what I can do with that

09:53

I'll check the dallas datacetner

09:58

Is this what you were looking for?

Image attachment

09:58

I was testing the dallas server from my home here is fremont CA

hmm

10:07

its definitely good; not 40gbits, although maybe this speedtest doesnt go that high either

who knows

idk

10:07

how did u measure 40

I took their word for it lol

10:07

That is what they claim for that subscription plan

iiwy i would try to verify it somehow

10:08

by looking for other speedtest services that can go higher

10:08

http://speedtest.tele2.net/100GB.zip

ok will give it a try

download this and do vnstat -l after lik a minute

10:08

(then kill the download after uve got speed)

where do I find vnstat? Its not on my servers

install it

10:10

apt-get install vnstat

ah lol ok

it is a useful thing to have on server anyway

This was many times less than the first one:

Image attachment

10:17

I think a play-test is the best way to analyze it

that doesnt seem right, huh

I know my Alien Arena servers get good marks from players near the relevant datacenter

You can't actually measure a 40g link unless you have another 40g link

(edited)

tbh i dont know the best way to

10:18

yeah

10:18

that^ lol

lol yep

send a file from one of ur servers to another one

won't work, datacenters have even larger links for internal transfers

i assumed differnt servers = different cities

10:19

or would that still be a problem

In my case they do exist on different datacenters

as far as I'm aware linode offers shared servers

10:20

you can get dedicated cpu cores, dedicated ram, storage but as far as I'm aware, you'll be sharing the network

Yes those stats are what linode claims to offer

10:21

I've always believed it

I wonder how much of that they let you use, if they don't limit per client bandwidth it might be a great idea to move to linode

try iperf or something

honestly, I'm not even sure the software stack they run can put out the 40g out of the virtual machine to the hypervisor and then to the network

maybe it only applies to root servers?

There is some shared resources, for example the monthly total data transferred

Linode is one of those future is cloud hosters, they give you very low level virtualized slices

10:25

They can even give you dedicated cpu cores, digitalocean also offers the same kind of hosting

But looking at it you would have a hard time hitting that limit as I spend $1100 a month on hosting so the pool is very large

10:26

And I run some torrent servers, and still never come close to running out

huh, is linode torrent friendly?

Never given me any reason to not think so. I think as long as each server doesn't exceed their alotment you are free to use your bandwidth as you see fit. I host legal torrents, so there are no copyright issues

oo i used to have digitalocean

This is very interesting, I might get a linode to test for ddnet GER2 for the next round of tests

10:29

I mean the teeworlds networking stack is far from handling 40gbps but still, it'd be nice to not worry about the link speed while working on it

10:31

I wonder how long it'd take for them to boot us off their network if we get ddos

They switched to using a get-it-first, then-pay-later service now

10:31

You used to have to pay first, then use it

do they nullroute

Makes it easy to spin one up for testing, then shut it down when you don't need it anymore

@noby now that'd be a buzzkill

yes thats why i stopped using digitalocean

you have 40gbps, but if you use more then a certain amount, we'll nullroute you would be the scummiest marketing tactic ever

hahahah

lol no as far as I know they dont do that

10:33

Ive been using linode since 2012 or so

whats the fastest data transfer uve personally seen on one of the servers

They never gave me any trouble, even when I was unknowinglyu hosting sony psp games

10:34

Never measured it till today

10:34

I just had to remove the offending files

10:35

I ended up shutting down that whole linode

the only way you get to measure something like that would be to download a large very well seeded torrent

10:37

with hetzners very unsatisfactory peerings, I can usually get around 85MB/s on my gbit link

saddo

2

Ive seen more than 125MB/s on some of my servers that are running transmission

it's not like bandwidth is so critical for simple teeworlds servers, is it?

i wouldn't think so

10:57

while it may use more than a bbs or mud, odds are you wont come near hitting the limit

@Dune idk, ddos on teeworlds is pretty common, it might help to host on a server where the link wont be able to be saturated by any of the common attacks

I guess

is there an issue for official servers?

because almost all of the attacks i see that spoof ips and use tw protocol are under 1gbit/s

11:10

because they are all probably coming from a single server with a 1gbit link

11:10

so 40gbits would be an advantage here

the bandwidth is useless to down a server, simulating the protocol is enough to saturate the cpu

it depends where the packets get intercepted

11:10

if they reach the tw server definitely

afterall some shit like this got fixed on 0.7

if they are blocked by a firewall or even iptables it might make a diference

11:11

well 0.7 fixed the reflection attacks atl east

@noby yes but remember on 0.6 you can't really filter like that, overwise you could hide the server or not allow people to join

mm

on 0.7 it's much easier

yeah requiring 500byte packet to do inforequest was a good thing i suppose

there's a token check

11:12

also

yes but ive found

11:12

that generating the token itself is sometimes a bottlneck

11:12

and with 0.7 masters, u have to use the md5 stuff, or it wont work

the way the networking is set up, it can't quite handle this insane amount of traffic, doesn't quite matter what part of the protocol you are abusing

@Learath2 I just meant by that that even a guy with an adsl could make lag a 0.6 server

I highly doubt that

well not rly adsl, lets say vdsl2+

I don't think a 10mbps attack is interesting either

if they could spoof maybe

@Learath2 well i'm not lying

not vulnerable to spoofing anymore either

noby could tell that too, he remembers this shitty host nfoservers

11:14

when vali was taking us down with 10mbps

we regularly get 10mbps, it's rarely an issue

i never used nfo servers, but i do remember my old fng servers with 0 optimizations to the netcode on a server with no firewall or ddos protection and 10mbits would lag it

bombay was on nfo at the start, when I joined the clan

the optimizations in code made the servers withstand up to ~100-200mbits

we already have fixes for most of these, we don't maintain state for early connections, we don't respond with full serverinfo if it's getting flooded, we cache the serverinfo so it doesn't cause exponential cpu usage

that's why for me it's stupid to make 0.6 + 0.7 protocol when you still have some noobs trying to attack multiple servers on 0.6 side

11:16

@Learath2 yes we do that too

the 0.6 protocol is not much more vulnerable then the 0.7 protocol, we just lack the large token request to prevent reflection, instead we keep the reflection ratio down by sending small serverinfo

i guess that also makes inforequest floods less effective

it is more than the 0.7 one

more what?

vulnerable

the reflection ratio, yes, if it is actually vulnerable, create a github issue or if you think it's critical, let us know in private

we also started since a long time to move on eBPF to filter some useless packets

the fact of the matter is that the networking stack can only handle so much packets per second, which scales with core count and the networking code itself can handle only so many packets without lagging being in the same loop as the gameserver

i think the idea is to filter out as much as possible before it ever even reaches userspace

exactly, if it gets to the teeworlds network code, you are pretty much already fucked

yep

that's why most modern "game anti ddos" solutions rely on hardware firewalls specifically optimized to drop packets based on rules made for the game

In some cases the host even limits the number of packets per second, no matter how high the bandwidth is

11:22

And the technology used for network virtualization also matters

@redix +1

11:23

but well for that case..

afaik, arbor can even keep state nowadays, you can teach it your protocol and it knows when a client has established connection to your server, after that, no filtering for that ip

ovh's brain: "block all packets with same data", "let pass all packets with same data + one random byte"

@redix if you want to actually perform under large ddos, I don't really think even the slimmer virtualisation options are workable anymore

@Learath2 well stateful connections are one way to filter some attacks on teeworlds if it is done correctly

11:26

pretty sure if tw had a tcp socket for session then an udp one for ingame data, things would be much better

I'm not sure about that. See things like SR-IOV. But you often need special drivers and an optimized network stack for this

I did work on a branch like this, having a separate control connection over tcp would indeed help a lot

11:28

the network code proved too intertwined for me

yah that's a lot after behind

a connection socket that is on a separate thread with a core dedicated to it that's as barebones as possible would be what I go for

yap, for me that's way better than the actual way to go

could even have the connection thread interact with the firewall, e.g. only allow people who went through the connection process to contact the actual gameserver

would be easy to make a fw for that on kernel space

11:34

+ yah communicating with userspace

Whitch is the max velspeed?

20:45

Cause if u press ctrl + shift + D you can see in top right a value named velspeed

you mean ground max speed?

23:44

f1 -> dbg_tuning 1 should give more detail to default tunings

1

Exported 187 message(s)