Page 1 of 2
/oper idea
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 4:16 am
by w00t
Just curious, would it be possible to permit remote opering of all but locops? This would be useful in an environment where you have a large uncontrolled pooling DNS, since you are never sure where you might end up, and... yes... Just an idea.
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 4:21 am
by aquanight
Kinda tricky really, since successful global /opers are announced as "MODE opernick +oandfriends" and failed opers... well we know there.
Unfortunately, there really isn't any direct mechanism to send the results of a successful "remote oper", and I don't know how code/syz would like to do this.
On a side note, I think I saw something similar on the bugs forum
.
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 4:32 am
by w00t
Well, the way I imagined it working was with a new parameter:
/oper <uid> <pass> [servername]
ie /oper w00t testpass zap.netronet.com
It would then send a request for auth to zap.netronet.com or something, similar to /whois <nick> [nick] I guess. (this is a spur of the moment thought, you can tell can't you
)
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:22 am
by codemastr
Why not just use remote includes to load the oper block on all servers?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:25 am
by w00t
...
You know, I didnt think of that!
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:54 am
by Stealth
But what about those without remote includes (since it IS so difficult to install for alot of us)
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2004 9:47 am
by w00t
Like us
Just tried, and remote includes refuse to work (!)
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 3:36 am
by katsklaw
what would be the difference from this and a global IRCOp?
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 7:07 am
by Stealth
This would enable that global oper to log in on any server in the network without remote includes, or duplicate oper blocks on all the servers.
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:44 pm
by katsklaw
why would you need that? A global oper can already affect other servers remotely.
I guess what I'm asking for is a specific example.
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 10:42 pm
by Stealth
An additional parameter to /oper
/oper Nick Passwd [server]
When the server parameter is specified, that server will then return to the server the oper is on a success or fail. The success responce should contain the flags and info for the oper, and the fail should return the appropriate reason.
Example:
Global-oper has an oline on server-A
Global-oper is connected to server-B
Global-oper would login as follows:
/oper Global-oper password server-A.mynet.com
server-A then responds with a success or fail:
success: sends the needed information to server-B
fail: sends the reason why it failed
Hope that helps.
Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 10:52 pm
by katsklaw
No it don't help .. it don't matter what server the global oper is on .. they have equal access network wide.
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 12:32 am
by Stealth
Yes, they do have access network wide. This suggestion is so they can log in on any server on the network.
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 12:46 am
by aquanight
The question is, how do you go about indicating success or failure? Sure you can go and send the ERR_NOOPERHOST error across server boundaries, but you can't indicate a success by any standard means (sending a MODE +o) because the only server that can change a MODE for a client is either the server holding that client, or a U:Lined server using SVS[2]MODE.
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 1:03 am
by katsklaw
Stealth wrote:Yes, they do have access network wide. This suggestion is so they can log in on any server on the network.
I totally disagree with this feature then .. Servers are to be staffed by their own staff .. not by anyone. If an oper can't do his/her duties from their own server ... then they don't need an O:Line.
coders, if this is implemeted .. please make it so I can switch it off.