Fact on msn p2p (!)

[dx]

tech stuff warning! some knowledge about msn p2p protocol required.

The official client increases the client field globally - this is more obvious on DC invites where you receive a invite after accepting the file. For example

<<< DC Invite - identifier 12345
>>> "I don't care" message (not a decline, just some random wrongness - aka internal development bug)
<<< some data message - identifier 12346
<<< another data message - identifier 12347
<<< "I didn't hear you, so i assume you haven't replied me and tell you that with an annoying message with flag 4"
    --identifier 12348
<<< last data message - identifier 12349
>>> (data ack)
<<< bye msnslp message - identifier 12350
>>> (bye ack)
<<< "I'm still waiting for a reply to my DC invite, and you hadn't replied my other annoying message, so if you don't reply everything, even those messages that you dropped, in a minute i will stop sending data because i'm evil. Yes, this is flag 4." - identifier 12351


I wrote a DC invite handler (because declining is the same as canceling - that doesn't mean that i will implement DC now), but i found that i can't track those flag 4 messages (i have to, even if i reply the original invite message the right way.. there could be some big network latency that makes me receive both invite and flag 4 message).

I considered a "last identifier" variable on P2PUser, but that seems hacky and i'm not sure if this applies to everything (DP/CE senders/receivers included)

Relying on identifiers sucks, but it's the only way to identify negotiation messages. As I always say, some people died messing with direct connect/identifiers.

[dx]

c10ud, can you explain me why is this in news?
i mean, WTF?

[C10uD]

noone posted here, i don't want you to be alone

[fabioamd87]

i'm not very tecnical, but what does it mean all of this?

[dx]

It means that direct connect invites must be answered exactly as the official likes it.

I don't know why i posted this, maybe because each reimplementation of msn p2p is a pain. So it may be helpful is someone else needs help with this problem.

[fabioamd87]

but i don't understand, it's not yet implemented? by msnp or just other clients?

[dx]

but i don't understand, it's not yet implemented? by msnp or just other clients?

Nope, not implemented. First we need it working without direct connect. And.. direct connect is the only problem left. (the *official client* wanted to establish a direct connection, we didn't reply well)

My solution: reply as pidgin does (<3)

[andre.ramaciotti]

And what about aMSN? Does it have a MSN p2p implementation?

[C10uD]

yes, but that's TCL and it's like reading ancient aramaic (for me, at least... i'm not an emesene dev but i can read python/c/c++ quite easily..)

[fabioamd87]

but the string for the request shoudn't be the same?

[guillaume]

pidgin doesn't have direct connection did they ? am i missing something when you say

My solution: reply as pidgin does (<3)

[C10uD]

pidgin doesn't have direct connection did they ? am i missing something when you say

My solution: reply as pidgin does (<3)

if i remember well dx told me pidgin ignores those DC invites so... lol

but the string for the request shoudn't be the same?

yes, but you have to construct it first..

[dx]

c10ud is right. (?)

- tcl (amsn) is even more unreadable than perl ("VALID PERL CODE"). Also their implementation isn't correctly separated from the GUI. But they implemented DC - that's useless to me now.
- Pidgin is C. "C" stands for "Cool". They tried to implement DC but some days after someone found the developer dead. The code is commented-out now (#ifdef 0). That implementation is useful - it allows the file to transfer via switchboard, not direct connection, without this problem.

I didn't understand fabioamd87, but msn p2p is a complex protocol and wlm is very strict. "Invite-reply-acknowledge" is the simplest form of negotiation..

[fabioamd87]

i understand, and what to say about pidgin devel that tried to implement p2p... mayhem rockz!

[TJUndead]

Uhm... Sorry for this comment, but why you guys don't ask for a little help from Pidgin or aMSN developers? ^_^