UnrealIRCd Forums

Some of the ops on this network have reported a problem setting bans in some channels, for this post #Channel1 and #Channel2. We are using standard Unreal3.2.3, with standard NeoStats.

Ch1 has about 200 users, Ch2 has about 800 users.

The problem is a ban limit. in #Ch1, the number is 34, in #Ch2 the number is 29. Once bans reach that level, no further bans can be set.

Extract from my status window:

[05-09:30:17] -OperServ- JOINING: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxer.co.uk
[05-09:30:17] -OperServ- Scan complete.
#Channel1 *!*@Host.com.au Channel ban/ignore list is full
[05-09:31:56] -> *OperServ* NotInChanList Join
[05-09:31:57] -OperServ- Scaning for users not in channels.
[05-09:31:57] -OperServ- Match: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxde.net

The message received when the op tries to set the ban is not from services or from a bot, but it appears as if it is direct from the ircd ( as shown above).

The problem is not in all channels. Non opered persons can successfully set bans in other channels when the ban list is over 40.

The problem is not with eggdrops .. the eggdrops were deoped and still the same problem.

The problem is not with modes C or T .. they were removed and still the same problem.

The problem does not appear to be server related. Different people on different servers (on the net) report the same problem.

There appears to be no setting in unrealircd.conf that limits bans or channel ignores (btw what on earth is a channel ignore ?).

It doesn't appear to be an IRCd setting, because the critical number is different on the two channels, 34 for #Ch1 and 29 for #Ch2.

Here is an explanation of Raw478 Before I do something silly and post a bug report for what might be a human error, does anyone have any ideas?

Tam

It doesn't appear to be an IRCd setting, because the critical number is different on the two channels, 34 for #Ch1 and 29 for #Ch2

It IS an IRCd setting. It isn't just based on the number of entries, it is also based on their lengths. Otherwise, you could have 10 bans but still use a ton of memory.

Thanks,

It looks like we will have to change the way we set our bans.

Tam