[Flightgear-devel] mpserver02 close down
Hi all, I'm reluctant to announce that I have to (finally) shutdown mpserver02 permanently. Rather than continuing to shape bandwidth and blocking IPs from different countries, which will only degrade the experience of FG's multiplay, I think it is time to simply shut it down and let other servers take over and do a better job. The fact that FG mpserver is now using more and more bandwidth is a good sign, meaning FG is getting more and more popular, and that's very exciting! I also apologize for not being able to give an earlier notice. (My) mpserver02 is already shutdown as you read this, until someone else takes over the and replace it. I shall leave this to other mpserver admins (and also Curt to update the DNS). I will continue to host mpmap02 since it uses a lot less traffic, at least for now ;) Sorry again, and thanks. Pigeon. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Compiler error
Hi all, I am compiling fgfs with download_and_compile.sh on Ubuntu 10.04. Latest GIT (one hour ago) is giving errors in hud.cxx: hud.cxx: In function 'void fgUpdateHUDVirtual(osg::State*)': hud.cxx:348: error: 'gluPerspective' was not declared in this scope hud.cxx:361: error: 'gluLookAt' was not declared in this scope hud.cxx: In function 'void fgUpdateHUD(osg::State*, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat)': hud.cxx:397: error: 'gluOrtho2D' was not declared in this scope m -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Compiler error
I used OSG version 2.9.10. The error probably has something to do with a recent change, because yesterday's compilation was fine. I guess I could roll back to an older version of OSG, like you suggested, but I was rather hoping my message would ring a bell with someone that committed a change between yesterday and today. Am I missing the point? m Op 07-10-10 16:19, willie schreef: On 07/10/10 14:09, fiers...@zonnet.nl wrote: Hi all, I am compiling fgfs with download_and_compile.sh on Ubuntu 10.04. Latest GIT (one hour ago) is giving errors in hud.cxx: hud.cxx: In function ‘void fgUpdateHUDVirtual(osg::State*)’: hud.cxx:348: error: ‘gluPerspective’ was not declared in this scope hud.cxx:361: error: ‘gluLookAt’ was not declared in this scope hud.cxx: In function ‘void fgUpdateHUD(osg::State*, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat)’: hud.cxx:397: error: ‘gluOrtho2D’ was not declared in this scope please check the version of OpenSceneGraph you are using. /bin/osgversion in your OSG install dir I think that script is slightly flawed in that it grabs the SVN version of OSG which may have been correct when the script was written but not now. Download a stable version of OSG (2.9.8 works for me) and try again, please. Let us know how it goes. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Compiler error
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:12 PM, fiers...@zonnet.nl wrote: I used OSG version 2.9.10. The error probably has something to do with a recent change, because yesterday's compilation was fine. I guess I could roll back to an older version of OSG, like you suggested, but I was rather hoping my message would ring a bell with someone that committed a change between yesterday and today. Am I missing the point? Sort of. The problem is due to a change in OSG between yesterday and today. Tim m Op 07-10-10 16:19, willie schreef: On 07/10/10 14:09, fiers...@zonnet.nl wrote: Hi all, I am compiling fgfs with download_and_compile.sh on Ubuntu 10.04. Latest GIT (one hour ago) is giving errors in hud.cxx: hud.cxx: In function ‘void fgUpdateHUDVirtual(osg::State*)’: hud.cxx:348: error: ‘gluPerspective’ was not declared in this scope hud.cxx:361: error: ‘gluLookAt’ was not declared in this scope hud.cxx: In function ‘void fgUpdateHUD(osg::State*, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat)’: hud.cxx:397: error: ‘gluOrtho2D’ was not declared in this scope please check the version of OpenSceneGraph you are using. /bin/osgversion in your OSG install dir I think that script is slightly flawed in that it grabs the SVN version of OSG which may have been correct when the script was written but not now. Download a stable version of OSG (2.9.8 works for me) and try again, please. Let us know how it goes. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
Hi Pigeon, Thanks for running a server all these years, it's been a big service to our community! Do you have any bandwidth statistics or estimates that you've collected over the years? What kind of usage per month are we at? As you know, serious bandwidth and dedicated servers start costing real money. Do you have some ball park estimates of bandwidth usage, or basic server requirements to run a solid multiplayer system and keep up with the load? I haven't researched this, but I wonder what a fair price would be to rent a dedicated linux server with an unmetered 100mbit connection to the internet? Would that be sufficient to run a good multiplayer server? This maybe should be introduced under it's own thread, but maybe this is just as good a way to segue as any ... I was recently approached by a developer from open candy. They offer a service similar in principle to google ads, but works at the windows installer level. After you install the intended software, a page comes up asking if you want to install any of the additional suggested packages. They all default to no, so you have to opt in to install something and you don't have any nasty surprises. Open Candy does collect enough non user identifyable stats to verify that one of the suggested packages was successfully installed to completion. If an end user does install a package, we get paid some number of pennies depending on which package, which country the user is in, and whatever other criteria open-candy decides to use. I'm sure we will not achieve universal consensus on whether if this is a good idea or not, but I wanted to float the idea and get opinions and discussion. If it generates a revenue stream sufficient to buy some decent multiplayer server bandwidth, fgcom bandwidth, etc. would it be worth adding this to our default installer? Open Candy has a web site: http://www.opencandy.com You can go there and see a demo movie of what this might look like to the end user. Open Candy would work as a plugin dll to our installer so as far as I understand it doesn't install anything or modify anything on the user's pc. They do collect some information and stats, but they claim it's all non user identifiable and they do list what they collect on their faq at their web site. On the grand scale, I think open-candy is pretty innocuous and you have to opt in for anything extra to get installed. If it would provide a mechanism to buy the bandwidth we need to run good/solid multiplayer servers would it be worth doing? Any thoughts and comments from our developers? Thanks, Curt. On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 7:03 AM, Pigeon wrote: Hi all, I'm reluctant to announce that I have to (finally) shutdown mpserver02 permanently. Rather than continuing to shape bandwidth and blocking IPs from different countries, which will only degrade the experience of FG's multiplay, I think it is time to simply shut it down and let other servers take over and do a better job. The fact that FG mpserver is now using more and more bandwidth is a good sign, meaning FG is getting more and more popular, and that's very exciting! I also apologize for not being able to give an earlier notice. (My) mpserver02 is already shutdown as you read this, until someone else takes over the and replace it. I shall leave this to other mpserver admins (and also Curt to update the DNS). I will continue to host mpmap02 since it uses a lot less traffic, at least for now ;) Sorry again, and thanks. Pigeon. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/curt/http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/personal/curt/ -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: Hi Pigeon, Thanks for running a server all these years, it's been a big service to our community! Do you have any bandwidth statistics or estimates that you've collected over the years? What kind of usage per month are we at? As you know, serious bandwidth and dedicated servers start costing real money. Do you have some ball park estimates of bandwidth usage, or basic server requirements to run a solid multiplayer system and keep up with the load? I haven't researched this, but I wonder what a fair price would be to rent a dedicated linux server with an unmetered 100mbit connection to the internet? Would that be sufficient to run a good multiplayer server? This maybe should be introduced under it's own thread, but maybe this is just as good a way to segue as any ... I'd be prepared to contribute some money for a dedicated MP/code/download server, even if it was in the US and I wouldn't benefit personally. I'm sure with a bit of publicity using the newsletter we could get together sufficient contributions. We could even offer immortality in the THANKS file for the project, if we were feeling particularly generous. In fact taking this one stage further, one of the loading messages could be modified to display Thanks to ., taking a name at random from the THANKS file... -Stuart -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Compiler error
On Oct 7, 2010, at 11:16 AM, Tim Moore wrote: On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:12 PM, fiers...@zonnet.nl wrote: I used OSG version 2.9.10. The error probably has something to do with a recent change, because yesterday's compilation was fine. I guess I could roll back to an older version of OSG, like you suggested, but I was rather hoping my message would ring a bell with someone that committed a change between yesterday and today. Am I missing the point? Sort of. The problem is due to a change in OSG between yesterday and today. Robert merged glu* functions into the osg namespace today e.g. try osg::gluLookAt(..) etc I have now moved the subset of glu functions that are now part of the core OSG library into the osg namespace, so the likes of gluScaleImage now would be used osg::gluScaleImage. HTH Norman Tim m Op 07-10-10 16:19, willie schreef: On 07/10/10 14:09, fiers...@zonnet.nl wrote: Hi all, I am compiling fgfs with download_and_compile.sh on Ubuntu 10.04. Latest GIT (one hour ago) is giving errors in hud.cxx: hud.cxx: In function ‘void fgUpdateHUDVirtual(osg::State*)’: hud.cxx:348: error: ‘gluPerspective’ was not declared in this scope hud.cxx:361: error: ‘gluLookAt’ was not declared in this scope hud.cxx: In function ‘void fgUpdateHUD(osg::State*, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat, GLfloat)’: hud.cxx:397: error: ‘gluOrtho2D’ was not declared in this scope please check the version of OpenSceneGraph you are using. /bin/osgversion in your OSG install dir I think that script is slightly flawed in that it grabs the SVN version of OSG which may have been correct when the script was written but not now. Download a stable version of OSG (2.9.8 works for me) and try again, please. Let us know how it goes. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
On Thursday 07 October 2010 17:38:13 Curtis Olson wrote: I haven't researched this, but I wonder what a fair price would be to rent a dedicated linux server with an unmetered 100mbit connection to the internet? Would that be sufficient to run a good multiplayer server? One company that I can certainly recommend is Hetzner in Germany (www.hetzner.de). I pay 49 Euros per month for a root server with a Core i7-920, 8GB RAM and 2x750GB HDD. 100MBit/s connection with unlimited traffic. Unlimited meaning 5TB/month after which speed gets reduced to 10MBit/s. They also have smaller offers like an entry server at 29 Euros per month for which you get an Athlon 64, 1GB RAM, and 2 TB traffic. No, I do not work for them, but I'm a very satisfied customer who hasn't found nearly bang for the buck and quality anywhere else :) But if someone can correct me, I'd be grateful. Stefan -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] recent environment changes break airport elevation with metar altimeter settings
After 18 minutes sitting on the runway with the altimeter setting matching the current METAR, the altimeter is still showing 100 ft too high. Questions: Q1: Since there has not been a METAR change, why is interpolation smoothing necessary at launch. Q2: The rate of interpolation seems excruciatingly slow. Can this be increased? Dave, i have commited some changes to fg and fgdata. Could you please check if these help with your issue? I tested this with commandline fgfs --airport=kord --disable-real-weather-fetch --metar=KORD 042151Z 25010KT 10SM FEW043 SCT200 14/04 A3035 RMK AO2 SLP281 T01390044 --timeofday=noon the result looks good to me. Thanks, Torsten -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] recent environment changes break airport elevation with metar altimeter settings
On 10/07/2010 11:08 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote: After 18 minutes sitting on the runway with the altimeter setting matching the current METAR, the altimeter is still showing 100 ft too high. Questions: Q1: Since there has not been a METAR change, why is interpolation smoothing necessary at launch. Q2: The rate of interpolation seems excruciatingly slow. Can this be increased? Dave, i have commited some changes to fg and fgdata. Could you please check if these help with your issue? I tested this with commandline fgfs --airport=kord --disable-real-weather-fetch --metar=KORD 042151Z 25010KT 10SM FEW043 SCT200 14/04 A3035 RMK AO2 SLP281 T01390044 --timeofday=noon the result looks good to me. Thanks, Torsten Looks great here also. Thanks, Dave -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Stuart Buchanan stuar...@gmail.com wrote: I'd be prepared to contribute some money for a dedicated MP/code/download server, even if it was in the US and I wouldn't benefit personally. I'm sure with a bit of publicity using the newsletter we could get together sufficient contributions. We could even offer immortality in the THANKS file for the project, if we were feeling particularly generous. Just to back Stuart up, I had similar thoughts about contributions and use of the newsletter. I would be pleased to donate funds regularly to help maintain suitable MP servers. I can't speak for others, but I'm willing to bet there are many like-minded members of the community out there. -Gary aka Buckaroo -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
Gary and Stuart, We could certainly explore the donation route. I'm doing a little bit of research to try to determine what the realistic costs would be to setup a dedicated server to run a multiplayer system. That will give us a better idea what we need to shoot for. Don't feel like you have to talk personal donation amounts in public, but since we are on the subject, what's fair or realistic to ask someone to donate per month or per year for something like this? If we go the donation route, will someone have to be constantly pestering everyone to get their donations in this month? Will this be an ongoing hassle trying to chase people down or drum up new donations to keep the service running? Can we expect that people would commit to donating some fixed dollar amount per month in perpetuity? I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable making such a promise myself. One time donations are a lot easier to get, but then we'd have to have someone always hunting for more donations. What happens if we come up short in a month or a year? Do we cancel the service? Do more begging? What if we collect more than we need? FlightGear isn't an official non-profit which makes it harder to ask for donations. Setting up a non-profit organization would be a real good idea, but that takes someone who (a) knows how to do it and (b) can commit to spending the non-trivial amount of time required to manage the non-profit, file the paperwork, file tax returns, whatever else needs to get done. There would be some non-trivial amount of overhead in managing a non-profit which means a substantial portion of donated money would go to overhead, not the intended purpose. I'm just trying to think though the various scenarios realistically. There are a lot of sticky questions or the potential to seriously burn up the time of key volunteers (or their money if we come up short on donations and want to try to maintain the services.) We could continue in our current mode where we try to get people to volunteer their own servers or their own bandwidth (or servers/bandwidth they have control over). This can work, but as our popularity and loads increase, this can be a bigger and bigger burden. Volunteer services like this work best if they can fly under the radar screen and not cause a problem or show up as the primary resource hog when you print out usage stats reports. So this is why I floated what I think is at least an interesting idea. Seeing if we could generate a consistent revenue trickle through software ads/recommendations in our installer (i.e. www.opencandy.com) Presumably if the stream provided enough funds to buy some server bandwidth, it would be relatively consistent and pretty easy for a single person to manage the whole process much easier than the other options. I'm just making wild guesses at costs and possible revenue right now, but if it worked out it would be pretty slick, and would presumably scale with the popularity of FlightGear. It's all open for discussion, and I don't want to link open-candy only with paying for a multiplayer server, that's just the route my thought process went through. For what it's worth, another model would be to setup a commercial multiplayer server and charge people to access it, but that would require a lot of infrastructure development and is probably my least favorite of all the options. It would be nice if people could fly as much as they want online for free, except nothing is ever completely free so the question is who is willing to pay and in what form is the payment made (donations of money or servers, charge per use, having to click through a page of suggested software packages when you install the software, etc.) Thinking out loud here Curt. On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Gary Neely wrote: On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: I'd be prepared to contribute some money for a dedicated MP/code/download server, even if it was in the US and I wouldn't benefit personally. I'm sure with a bit of publicity using the newsletter we could get together sufficient contributions. We could even offer immortality in the THANKS file for the project, if we were feeling particularly generous. Just to back Stuart up, I had similar thoughts about contributions and use of the newsletter. I would be pleased to donate funds regularly to help maintain suitable MP servers. I can't speak for others, but I'm willing to bet there are many like-minded members of the community out there. -Gary aka Buckaroo -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
Stefan Seifert wrote: On Thursday 07 October 2010 17:38:13 Curtis Olson wrote: I haven't researched this, but I wonder what a fair price would be to rent a dedicated linux server with an unmetered 100mbit connection to the internet? Would that be sufficient to run a good multiplayer server? One company that I can certainly recommend is Hetzner in Germany (www.hetzner.de). I pay 49 Euros per month for a root server with a Core i7-920, 8GB RAM and 2x750GB HDD. 100MBit/s connection with unlimited traffic. Unlimited meaning 5TB/month after which speed gets reduced to 10MBit/s. They also have smaller offers like an entry server at 29 Euros per month for which you get an Athlon 64, 1GB RAM, and 2 TB traffic. No, I do not work for them, but I'm a very satisfied customer who hasn't found nearly bang for the buck and quality anywhere else :) But if someone can correct me, I'd be grateful. Stefan -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel The Problem with Hetzner occurres when you start needing more fancy stuff, like decent IO, decent RAID, wand to work with ESX(i), etc. However, nowhere else will you get any server for that low price with those specs - sadly they let you pay for every extra something. i am not particularly satisfied with Hetzner, and have some worries there may be some insiders working with non-EU cracking groups, spam networks and the likes. The latency is not the greates there either, which can in some games and network protocols be quite crucial - i have no idea how important that is to FG though. however, if there is a server floating around which merely needs co-locating, hetzner does that too, and then all services seem a lot better - e.g. ip addresses are no longer bound to a mac address, ordering multiple ip addresses do not require an additional charge of 15 EUR / month for something called Flexi-Pack (that is the most rediculous thing i have ever heard of with regards to hosting plans). if you can weigh out what is needed currently and what could be needed in the next, say 3 to 5 years and you believe it will patch a hetzner plan (by the way you can cancle contracts there on a monthly basis), then i can support the move. greets Nathanael -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
On 07/10/10 21:47, Hal V. Engel wrote: On Thursday, October 07, 2010 12:13:46 pm Curtis Olson wrote: Gary and Stuart, We could certainly explore the donation route. I'm doing a little bit of research to try to determine what the realistic costs would be to setup a dedicated server to run a multiplayer system. That will give us a better idea what we need to shoot for. I floated the idea on the multiplayer section of the forum. http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=32t=9651 We were talking specifically about a sub for the FGCom server that I persuaded my friend to donate. That donation of server and bandwidth is good until it begins to impact on his business and we simply floated the idea as a what-if. BTW we expect to be able to use this FGCom server for at least a year, possibly indefinitely, that's why I announced it as a medium term solution. However I think the results are applicable to FGCommunity servers in general. So Donations or subscriptions? If the subscription is mandatory, what minimum service would be expected? What is affordable? Some of the replies are instructive. Some guy thinks $20/month is reasonable. For many people that's simply unaffordable. Some want it to continue for free of course. Its been free so far, why should that change? Some people don't use PayPal and would have difficulty sending money(in any form) beyond their national borders. My own thoughts are that ~$15 every three months should cover FGCom, MPservers, MPmap and a 99.9% uptime. Not only that but a decent ToS and User Agreement that would mean we'd be kicking spammers and motormouths as well. That means its a full time job for 2-3 people and these costs need to be factored in, so we'd need several thousand subscribers to make it work. Or we do it for a lot less and skip the moderation. I definitely agree that some form of FlightGear Foundation is required to cover server costs and help with hardware for developers, pay for the BDFL to get to conferences ;- etc etc For now, I think Curt's idea about opencandy is well worth looking at. Donations are all very well but Id hate to try to guarantee any level of service and just hope donations come in. I'd be interested to see the demographics but I think most users and developers are now based outside the US so any Foundation will need to fully reflect the international nature of the project. -- Best Regards Willie Fleming -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02
Curtis Olson wrote: We could certainly explore the donation route. Just to add a funny side to this discussion: The land cover database is certainly among the most resource-intensive services in the entire project. Maybe it's even the first item on the list. Currently approx. a dozend CPU cores, hundreds of gigabytes of online RAID disk space and unlimited gigabit network uplink are employed here - at no cost ;-) It's just that the service has to match a certain 'topic' in order to recieve this sponsoring. Cheerio, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02
Martin Spott wrote: Just to add a funny side to this discussion: The land cover database is certainly among the most resource-intensive services in the entire project. well, except from the feed to 'TerraSync', which is definitely playing in its own league, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
We could certainly explore the donation route. I'm doing a little bit of research to try to determine what the realistic costs would be to setup a dedicated server to run a multiplayer system. That will give us a better idea what we need to shoot for. I agree that we need some real numbers before we can say what is realistic. I'm firmly of the opinion that whatever we do has to be completely voluntary. I don't really like the idea of a subscription based MP server. Neither do I like an advertising supported model. It feels like a pain to manage. The model I do like is one that seems to work for a jazz station I listen to: KCSM. They have fundraising drives every six months or so to cover their running costs. People give what they can but there is no obligation and no set amount. I like the idea of outsourcing the collection if we can find a suitable organisation but I suspect there are enough people with moderately deep pockets that it could be managed informally. The fewer actual donations, the less admin is required. I'd be willing to contribute £100 a year if someone else matched me. A couple more pledges like that and I'm sure we'd get there. I've known many people on this list long enough that I'd be happy to send them that amount of money on trust. -Stuart -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Curtis Olson curtol...@gmail.com wrote: Gary and Stuart, We could certainly explore the donation route. I'm doing a little bit of research to try to determine what the realistic costs would be to setup a dedicated server to run a multiplayer system. That will give us a better idea what we need to shoot for. Not sure why suddenly everybody wants to pay for things :) As far as MP is concerned we seem to be having enough volunteers to keep the system running. With 02 finally gone, MP will even work properly for a change (I have suggested multiple times to rename or discontinue it because it was causing more harm than it was useful). I am not aware of any other problems or mp server admins saying they can't keep things running due to missing funding. (It is funny how most servers are in Europe, though.) Side note: Sabin has been waiting for an official mpserver.flightgear.org address since may for the FREE mp server he started in Kansas. Which, being in the USA, could have taken much of the stress from Pigeon's 02. Unfortunately even though we had some discussion and even Curt offered to make the necessary DNS changes, nothing happened. Can we please finally assign a DNS to his FREE server? With 02 gone, and plenty of USA folks set up for using it, I (yet again) suggest to make the new server take over 02. Current MP servers only need one thing: bandwidth. It is widely known that our MP protocol is horribly inefficient with bandwidth usage. I would definitely try to fix that before asking for donations for better servers. That said, you can basically pick the cheapest virtual server that has good network speed and unlimited bandwidth. (By the way, Stefan, I would never use an evil bandwidth-throttling-type unlimited service, let alone recommend one!) Appropriate VPS servers can be had for as low as $20 per month. So much about MP. FGCom needs even less resources, the main problem there was missing installation instructions but thanks to Thomas and Willie that is sorted out. That leaves things like main site, wiki, mapserver, terrasync. Money could also be used for other things such as costs related to conferences. I am not against setting up donation collecting infrastructure for those but not built into FG (or even its installer - although I don't particularly care for windows users LOL). -- Csaba/Jester -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Stuart Buchanan stuar...@gmail.com wrote: We could certainly explore the donation route. I'm doing a little bit of research to try to determine what the realistic costs would be to setup a dedicated server to run a multiplayer system. That will give us a better idea what we need to shoot for. I agree that we need some real numbers before we can say what is realistic. I'm firmly of the opinion that whatever we do has to be completely voluntary. I don't really like the idea of a subscription based MP server. Neither do I like an advertising supported model. It feels like a pain to manage. The model I do like is one that seems to work for a jazz station I listen to: KCSM. They have fundraising drives every six months or so to cover their running costs. People give what they can but there is no obligation and no set amount. I like the idea of outsourcing the collection if we can find a suitable organisation but I suspect there are enough people with moderately deep pockets that it could be managed informally. The fewer actual donations, the less admin is required. I'd be willing to contribute £100 a year if someone else matched me. A couple more pledges like that and I'm sure we'd get there. I've known many people on this list long enough that I'd be happy to send them that amount of money on trust. -Stuart I need to spend some time following-up what Curt has suggested, and I would agree that no-money options are always welcome, but if decisions should result in a donation or fund-drive solution, then I'll pledge to match Stuart's £100 contribution. -Gary aka Buckaroo, Windows user. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
Can anyone help with a 3D cloud issue? The clouds now display as identical flat gray panels instead of their usual realistic appearance. This has persisted for (guessing) 6-8 weeks now. Here are a couple screen shots to illustrate the problem- http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1671/3dclouds1.jpg http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/8100/3dclouds2.jpg FlightGear and SimgGear are Gitorious 'next' branch, fgdata is Gitorious 'master'. ASUS A8V Deluxe motherboard, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ CPU, 2G memory. Video card is ATI Radeon 9700 Pro AGP. OS is Slackware64 Linux, kernel 2.6.35.5, X.org open source video driver (not the ATI proprietary one) using KMS. Any help with this is much appreciated. Gary -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buying server bandwidth (was: mpserver02 close down)
My two cents: Subscriptions need bookkeeping and decent administration of valid user accounts etc.. While there might be someone out there that is willing to do this task at this point in time, that will end some day. It will probably be hard to find volunteers for this task. I am in favor of donations, where fund raising is organised every year or so. A budget for server and bandwidth of $1 devided by 500 donators would amount to $20. Heck, I would be willing to pay for several years in advance for that kind of money if the payment method is suitable. I would be surprised if there would be difficulties in raising enough money. m Op 07-10-10 23:36, willie schreef: So Donations or subscriptions? -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
