Renegade Public Forums
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Home » General Discussions » Spam Fest » wwnet
Re: wwnet [message #491614 is a reply to message #491613] Fri, 01 July 2016 20:36 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
[EE]pickle-jucer is currently offline  [EE]pickle-jucer
Messages: 21
Registered: November 2009
Karma:
Recruit
jonwil wrote on Fri, 01 July 2016 19:16

That function at 0061BD90 happens to be a function even TT hasn't been able to figure out.

Ah, I see. Huh

I probably should have clarified: I didn't notice anything broken, I was just wondering if there was breaking changes to the networking code that I needed to worry about in the future. It is really cool that TT was able to keep backwards compatibility along with the new features added! Big Grin

The "packet type" I was talking about are the ones prefixed with "PACKETTYPE_", I don't know what they're referred to as normally because I just got them from the binary. Though, after a quick look at the strings from a TT bandtest.dll, it seems the new one I saw was probably "PACKETTYPE_RESOURCE_MANAGER"

So currently I have:
enum{
	PACKETTYPE_UNRELIABLE
	PACKETTYPE_RELIABLE
	PACKETTYPE_ACK
	PACKETTYPE_KEEPALIVE
	PACKETTYPE_CONNECT_CS
	PACKETTYPE_ACCEPT_SC
	PACKETTYPE_REFUSAL_SC
	PACKETTYPE_FIREWALL_PROBE

	// New from TT
	PACKETTYPE_RESOURCE_MANAGER
};


I'm currently able to parse all except: PACKETTYPE_UNRELIABLE, PACKETTYPE_FIREWALL_PROBE, (now) PACKETTYPE_RESOURCE_MANAGER, and partially PACKETTYPE_RELIABLE because I haven't implemented all of the NetClassIDs.




 
Read Message icon5.gif
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message icon9.gif
Previous Topic: Guess what I just remembered!
Next Topic: Just for the record!
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Apr 29 09:30:23 MST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00851 seconds