Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: anphanax on 1 November 2005, 06:09
-
First off, yes, I use Windows for games (and for class, which happens to be using VStudio .NET currently). Many of you already know I have Windows though. Anyways, wondering if anyone else ever runs into this...
I host a game server for people to connect to on Windows (it's a windows-only server at the moment, although the project may be ported to Linux), and i've noticed when I get heavy loads (too many people), sometimes the TCP/IP layer acts really wierd. For instance, showing 40 people connected to me, right after a ipconfig /release is bizarre, to say the least.
Today I happened to experience a BSOD from the nice driver.
DRIVER_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL
*** STOP: 0x000000D1 (0x0000000C, 0x00000002, 0x00000000, 0xB8EE5C0C)
*** tcpip.sys - Address B8EE5C0C base at B8EAD000, DateStamp 4294CC20
Anyone else who uses Windows for games ever get BSODs/Stop Errors /w tcpip.sys? (This is not a help request, i'm seeing if anyone else has run into wierd problems with this driver, which I heard Microsoft re-wrote or something for Vista, and that's just scary. I am aware I am at the mercy of Microsoft on this.)
-
That file would be put under heavy stress all over the world so I doubt it would be that otherwise you'd be hearing about it more.
What game is it because I would suggest that is the culprit. Also the extra people could be people pinging you or multiple connections per person.
-
just delete the file then burn the hdd. then get a new, bigger and faster hdd and put linux on it.:p
-
The TCP/IP bit from Windows NT was shamelessly ripped from BSD, I'm sure that the employees who implemented it do not fully understand it yet.
-
It's your NIC driver, not the TCP stack.
The TCP/IP bit from Windows NT was shamelessly ripped from BSD, I'm sure that the employees who implemented it do not fully understand it yet.
I'm sure they do. They wrote their own Kerberos implimetation from scratch, so I'm sure a thing like a TCP stack is not above their heads.
BTW: Everyones TCP stack is "shamelessly ripped from BSD". The BSD dudes invented it.
-
Oh an BTW, I know you all think Microsoft "ripped off" the TCP stack from BSD scource code, but they really didn't. This is just another outdated peice of anti-ms-propoganda that open source zealots don't want to let go of.
They purchased the TCP stack from a company called Spider Software when they were writing Win2k, and eventually wrote their own TCP stack from scratch for Widnows XP/2003 because spiders stack still had to be ported over somewhat. Spider Software's stack was based upon BSD code.
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/6/19/05641/7357
In the end all TCP stacks "derive" in one way or another from BSD, because as I stated above, BSD was the first system to have one.
-
All right, thanks for pointing it out.
There is a post on this forum somewhere that claims Microsoft directly took the TCP stack source code from BSD.
Anyway, I know many people who have been experiencing difficulties while using the internal nForce NIC and Windows XP.
Buying a RealTek NIC for $ 10, - may help.
-
There is a post on this forum somewhere that claims Microsoft directly took the TCP stack source code from BSD.
The licence doesn't disallow it, I don't see what the problem is.
-
My thinking is if M$ stole anything from BSD, wouldn't it work a lot better than it does currently ? I don't think it is to ANYONE'S advantage to claim that their code has been stolen by M$, why?
1) It won't get your code back
2) It means your code is contributing to a piece of shit OS
3) Your code is open source ... so saying they "stole" it is uhhh ... wrong
Maybe open source agreements should have some fine print at the bottom reading:
"The above agreement is null and void if your name is Bill Gates or you work for M$"
-
2) It means your code is contributing to a piece of shit OS
[snip]
"The above agreement is null and void if your name is Bill Gates or you work for M$"
There are different types of free software licences.
The GNU General Public Licence (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html#TOCGPL) is probably the most popular of them, as well as the BSD licence.
The major difference bettween them is that the GPL is "copyleft (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html#WhatIsCopyleft)".
Copyleft is a general method for making a program free software and requiring all modified and extended versions of the program to be free software as well.
The BSD licence isn't copyleft, anybody can use and modify BSD-licenced code for their own applications without releasing their own changes under a free licence, like what Microsoft have done here.
-
Ahhh, I see ... well then, you can't really argue that M$ stole it :)
I say all opensource software should be copyleft ... is there any reason why they arent ? Maybe they all don't hate M$ ? or maybe they want to give Mac or other non-free OSs the rights to use it ?
-
Ahhh, I see ... well then, you can't really argue that M$ stole it :)
Exactly.
I say all opensource software should be copyleft
I agree.
is there any reason why they arent ?
Well the BSD licence is the best choice for software that you want to be widely implemented, alot of the time.
(Although, it's not the kinda implementation I like - other companies using the code to their own benefit and the original writers getting nothing/little back for their own software)
-
Maybe open source agreements should have some fine print at the bottom reading:
"The above agreement is null and void if your name is Bill Gates or you work for M$"
If the license discriminates against anyone, it doesn't qualify as a true open source license.
http://opensource.org/docs/definition.php
-
Well, I think the copyleft would solve the M$ stealing opensource code problem, so there is no need for the discrimination fine print anymore :)
-
I don't known this is Microsoft's fault...
I've noticed that this only seems to happen when i'm running a program called "tcpview" from the SysInternals site (http://www.sysinternals.com). A lot of stuff on their site is freeware, but not open source :|.
-
Considering the first parameter is an invalid pointer, it sounds like a bug. I wouldn't be surprised if this was tcpview's fault, considering that sysinternals' software uses device drivers to do the dirty work. I'd recommend you to download the latest version of tcpview if you're using an old version, since pre-sp2 "hack" tools are likely to do stupid things on sp2 as the kernel has changed a little...