Beta client just became the official CryMP client

Page:1 2  

  • Koenigsegg

    @zi, "I tried to join your server with old client several times and it worked rather randomly". I believe that was on the mesa server a few weeks ago and you used your secu_login account and made two attempts or so. The server logs show no recent attempts by you using any of your accounts. Unless you were in ghost mode xD. secu_login hand shake with the master server is slow and redundant and by the time the master responds with credentials, the server validation window has closed. Master server is in Europe and the server is the US. Approximately 8k miles away. I don't know if this is a factor or not but what I do know is that I can connect 100% with static profileid on every attempt. I'm not saying "to burn the house down" and find a fix right away, there are plenty of other servers for players to join for now. Some things take time to unravel and this ssm or new client is no exception. Cheers

    ❤️ 0
  • Zi;

    No, I know that you accept only players with static ID, so I connected without using my secu_login account. You can check ping between your server and CryMP.net master easily: https://m.crymp.net/api/ping?ip=YOUR_SERVER_IP&port=64087 (ofc replace YOUR_SERVER_IP with your IP before accessing that URL, same for port :D) It's just ~130ms most of time. Anyways, you are right, it might be better idea to introduce that buggy behavior of sending !validate twice (just like old client does) into next version, so hopefully it works with all servers. It was removed because it was a bug, but as it seems, it was actually a feature 😄 P.S. Since you accept only players with static ID, how about you use RPC for that anyway? With RPC and UUID request, you can get static_id even for players that would log-in with !validate with non-static ID and I noticed you already do you use RPC For example, you receive this: {"locale":"en-US","uuid":"123456:789012","version":"17","latest":"17","timezone":-60,"static_proof":"s1234567890123456789","salt":"123","static_id":"1012345"} Now all you have to do is to send request to master as follows: https://crymp.net/api/validate?prof=10123456&uid=s1234567890123456789 If you receive {"ok":true}, you can consider auth to be correct, if not, you can consider it to be fake

    ❤️ 0
  • Comrade

    Introduced the double-validate bug in the development version of the new client. I'm not at home right now. Someone please test it: https://github.com/crymp-net/client-server/actions/runs/3304814351

    ❤️ 2
  • Zi;

    I tested in on rCX and it works!

    ❤️ 2
  • Koenigsegg

    @Zi, or @Comrade Zi; "Anyways, you are right, it might be better idea to introduce that buggy behavior of sending !validate twice (just like old client does) into next version, so hopefully it works with all servers. It was removed because it was a bug, but as it seems, it was actually a feature 😄" All of my ssm's I've used on Crymp.net have always required validate to execute twice as the first always returns a 0 profile. Zi; P.S. "Since you accept only players with static ID, how about you use RPC for that anyway? With RPC and UUID request, you can get static_id even for players that would log-in with !validate with non-static ID and I noticed you already do you use RPC". As I have said already, secu_login validation is for some reason delayed between server and master and simply takes too long. I can't use RCP for that because RCP performs other functions on the server. I am working on a version that may accept secu_login but it too will require validate x2. The ssm follows the the same sequence as other ssm on connect "OnClientConnect", "OnClientEnteredGame" etc ... but requires validate to execute twice for validation. Comrade: "Introduced the double-validate bug in the development version of the new client. I'm not at home right now. Someone please test it": https://github.com/crymp-net/client-server/actions/runs/3304814351 I tested the double-validate bug in the development version of the new client and it works. Only problem is the client up date system over writes it after installation. I am available to help test new client, just let me know when. Cheers

    ❤️ 0
  • Koenigsegg

    @Zi, or @Comrade Zi; "Anyways, you are right, it might be better idea to introduce that buggy behavior of sending !validate twice (just like old client does) into next version, so hopefully it works with all servers. It was removed because it was a bug, but as it seems, it was actually a feature 😄" All of my ssm's I've used on Crymp.net have always required validate to execute twice as the first always returns a 0 profile. Zi; P.S. "Since you accept only players with static ID, how about you use RPC for that anyway? With RPC and UUID request, you can get static_id even for players that would log-in with !validate with non-static ID and I noticed you already do you use RPC". As I have said already, secu_login validation is for some reason delayed between server and master and simply takes too long. I can't use RCP for that because RCP performs other functions on the server. I am working on a version that may accept secu_login but it too will require validate x2. The ssm follows the the same sequence as other ssm on connect "OnClientConnect", "OnClientEnteredGame" etc ... but requires validate to execute twice for validation. Comrade: "Introduced the double-validate bug in the development version of the new client. I'm not at home right now. Someone please test it": https://github.com/crymp-net/client-server/actions/runs/3304814351 I tested the double-validate bug in the development version of the new client and it works. Only problem is the client up date system over writes it after installation. So for now I can only used the old sfwcl. I am available to help test new client, just let me know when. Finale testing was completed today and the ssm is at 100% all systems go. Cheers

    ❤️ 2
  • Zi;

    Glad to hear it works for you! We hope to release the new version soon along with other reported bug fixes

    ❤️ 1
  • Koenigsegg

    @Zi; I tested the development version that sends !validate twice and it works but i still use the old sfwcl. I have not tested the new client for a prolonged period of time so I don't know how it would perform. Looks like other servers are also encountering issues with the new client. At this point, I don't know what to tell you.

    ❤️ 0
Page:1 2