Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

flood protection timeout configurable, another socket message to ignore for self signed certificates #54

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

erikzaadi
Copy link

fixed self signed certificate problem, made floodProtection timeout configurable and put some more safeties around when joining an empty channel

…onfigurable and put some more safeties around when joining an empty channel
@fent
Copy link
Contributor

fent commented Nov 3, 2011

Nice. I was just about to do the configurable timeout on flood protection. Well, I wanted to rewrite most of the activateFloodProtection function because it uses a set interval to check if there is a new message to be sent in the queue every so often.

It was mentioned in the first flood protection pull request that this method might make a user's message be delayed by the amount of time the interval is set to. Node.js is also meant to be fully evented. It would be better to check if a message has been sent in the last timeout, if so, add to a message queue, if not, send the message and call setTimeout to call a function that looks at the queue and sends the oldest message queue'd.

@martynsmith
Copy link
Owner

Having a quick read through your patch there looks to be three things in there.

Two of them I believe are resolved with other pull requests, and so this doesn't cleanly merge anymore.

Are you able to re-do the pull request with just the flood protection timeout (and ideally a patch to the documentation too) then I can merge it :-)

@erikzaadi
Copy link
Author

Sounds good, will do..

@lewinski
Copy link
Contributor

lewinski commented Feb 4, 2012

I just attached a separate/documented version of the flood protection portions of this original pull request. Please let me know if anything needs rewording.

@martynsmith
Copy link
Owner

Hmmm, that looks good, I just need to work out how to merge it (since it's not its own pull request).

If I get around to it I'll sort it out, otherwise if you get a chance perhaps you could make a pull request with that commit in it?

@martynsmith
Copy link
Owner

This pull request has too many different things on it. The commit referenced by lewinski looks good, I'll pull that separately when I organise myself (or if he could make a new pull request even better) :-)

Half-Shot referenced this pull request in matrix-org/node-irc Feb 23, 2019
…low-3.0.0

[Doppins] Upgrade dependency proxyquire to ^2.0.0
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants