UnrealIRCd Forums

Let's suppose we have two linked servers; server1 and server2. server1's owner own the network.

server2 is supposed to link to server1. However, server1's owner does not want to give operator access to server2's owner on his own server. He does not gives any operator block to server2's owner on server1. However, he wants to be an operator on all of his network.

My question is:

If server1's owner gives himself netadmin access in his server1's operblock, will he be able to perform operator actions on server2? And if server2's owner does the same, will he be able to have operator access to server1?

No. Why exactly do you need to be an oper on all servers anyway? The only reason I can see is being power hungry, and that spells disaster for an IRC network.

Actually, there was a reason to that before, but after reading something in the documentations, it's useless. Thanks anyways.

@codemastr, I can think of a reason, but its quite roundabout, so you're pretty much right The only feasible situation for having duplicate olies would be in say, a DDoS or other similar situation in which the server you have your oline on goes down, meaning you can't help fight the flooding anymore.

w00t wrote:@codemastr, I can think of a reason, but its quite roundabout, so you're pretty much right The only feasible situation for having duplicate olies would be in say, a DDoS or other similar situation in which the server you have your oline on goes down, meaning you can't help fight the flooding anymore.

If a flood is that strong .. there isn't anything you can do from inside IRC. Simply because the flood would have to come from outside IRC. This isn't the late 80's or early 90's .. severe floods from inside IRC aren't possible.

Well that might be a reason why you want one, however, I don't see why there needs to be a feature to force it. If you tell the admin, "our network rules say netadmins get olines everywhere" and they refuse to give one, well then don't link with that person!

Plus, remote includes work great for making "shared operblocks"...

Agreed all over, I was just trying to look at it from the other side of the issue.

And that's only if you can actually get Curl to work.

I have been an oper on newnet, and many opers there including me when I was, had one oline that was your primary, then you would arrange for an oline on one or two other servers simply for redundancy, so that if for some reason your server was down, you could still function. (In newnet's case this is good, because sometimes there are gaps when no opers are awake).

Cross wrote:I have been an oper on newnet, and many opers there including me when I was, had one oline that was your primary, then you would arrange for an oline on one or two other servers simply for redundancy, so that if for some reason your server was down, you could still function. (In newnet's case this is good, because sometimes there are gaps when no opers are awake).

I can see this on rather small nets . but with a net of good size, if the opers server is down .. then he can just chat for a while.

Don't get me wrong .. I agree with redundacy. I issue and have back-up O:Lines myself, however Iam also an avid believer in the Server admin desides who gets an O:Line on his/her server. I don't believe in oper commitees or other network staff making that call. Nor do I believe in all opers have access to all servers.

the best way I could see running a network (now) is using remote includes. Just because it allows you you to oper up on any server on the net. you can edit o:lines and other various configuration options remote and once preventing security problems and more work. there should be a mutual respect that your status is your own regardless of who's server you are on.

just a few rambling thoughts

Well, no. Like local opers. They are local for a reason, one would presume :p

theres a server admin for a reason too .. not just some patsy that pays for the shell/box.