Re: Insults

[brew]

It doesn't.... If it was then there'd be a few problems with that:
   1. I never even GET any data back, look at my packetlogs.
   2. It was working perfectly, literally 2 days ago.
   3. It was acually working last night, too.
   4. A popular chatbot that I use, called Alpha & Omega seemed to be having trouble connecting also.
   5. How would it be my DataArrival sub? The DataArrival event isn't even being raised first of all. (proven)
So skywing or yoni, care to explain ? Lol :/

[Don Cullen]

It doesn't.... If it was then there'd be a few problems with that:
   1. I never even GET any data back, look at my packetlogs.
   2. It was working perfectly, literally 2 days ago.
   3. It was acually working last night, too.
   4. A popular chatbot that I use, called Alpha & Omega seemed to be having trouble connecting also.
   5. How would it be my DataArrival sub? The DataArrival event isn't even being raised first of all. (proven)
So skywing or yoni, care to explain ? Lol :/

Sure. For one, I tested BNLS with my bot, with Stealth, and with Ruthless. I've experienced no problems.

For two, I've had other programmers confirm they were not having problems with BNLS.

For three, I've had two friends of mine who were not programmers use their own bots to test BNLS, again, they experienced no problems with BNLS.

I'll demonstrate with my bot (which I *just* coded); here's logs:

[2:18:03 PM] Username set.
[2:18:03 PM] Password set.
[2:18:03 PM] GameCode set to SEXP.
[2:18:03 PM] CDKey set.
[2:18:03 PM] Default Home channel set to Op xDMx.
[2:18:03 PM] UseLagPlug set.
[2:18:07 PM] Connecting to BNLS...
[2:18:07 PM] Connected to BNLS.
[2:18:07 PM] Connecting to BNET...
[2:18:07 PM] Connected to BNET.
[2:18:07 PM] 0x01 SID_EmuByte sent.
[2:18:07 PM] 0x50 SID_AUTH_INFO packet sent.
[2:18:07 PM] Received Packet: 0x25 (SID_PING)
[2:18:07 PM] 0x25 SID_PING packet sent.
[2:18:07 PM] Received Packet: 0x50 (SID_AUTH_INFO)
[2:18:07 PM] 0x01 BNLS_CDKEY packet sent.
[2:18:07 PM] Received Packet: 0x1 (BNLS_CDKEY)
[2:18:07 PM] 0x1A BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX2 packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0x1A (BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX2)
[2:18:10 PM] 0x51 SID_AUTH_CHECK packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0x51 (SID_AUTH_CHECK)
[2:18:10 PM] 0x51 Response: Authentication information accepted.
[2:18:10 PM] 0x0B BNLS_HASHDATA packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0x4C (SID_REQUIREDWORK)
[2:18:10 PM] 0x4C (SID_REQUIREDWORK) disregarded.
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0xB (BNLS_HASHDATA)
[2:18:10 PM] 0x3A SID_LOGONRESPONSE2 packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0x3A (SID_LOGONRESPONSE2)
[2:18:10 PM] 0x3A Response: Successfully logged on Battle.net!
[2:18:10 PM] 0x14 SID_UDPPINGRESPONSE packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] 0x0A SID_ENTERCHAT packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] 0x0C SID_JOINCHANNEL packet sent.
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0xA (SID_ENTERCHAT)
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0xF (SID_CHATEVENT)
[2:18:10 PM] Received Packet: 0xF (SID_CHATEVENT)
[2:18:14 PM] Sockets closed.

That was the debug log, this is the bnet chat window data:

[2:18:07 PM] Connecting to Battle.net...
[2:18:07 PM] Connected to Battle.net.
[2:18:10 PM] Logged in.
[2:18:10 PM] Joined Channel Op xDMx.
[2:18:14 PM] Disconnected.

Keep in mind, my bot is using pure BNLS; no local hashing, no BNCSUtil, no nothing. So if there was a problem with BNLS, my bot would break, period. And as clearly shown in the results from my testing two minutes ago, there's nothing wrong with BNLS.

[brew]

Maybe I myself could be ipbanned from BNLS. Let me try reconnecting my router for a second.

EDIT** SOLVED

DAMMIT I feel like an idiot. It's all because I forgot an "Exit Function" before the error in my GetClient function. Someone please shoot me.

Code Select Expand


Public Function GetClient(Client As String) As Long
    On Error GoTo Err
    Select Case Client
        Case "STAR": GetClient = 1
        Case "SEXP": GetClient = 2
        Case "W2BN": GetClient = 3
        Case "D2DV": GetClient = 4
        Case "D2XP": GetClient = 5
        Case "JSTR": GetClient = 6
        Case "WAR3": GetClient = 7
        Case "W3XP": GetClient = 8
        Case Else: GetClient = 0
    End Select
    Exit Function <------ the line I forgot to put in :( BreW = Dumbass much? Yes.
Err:
    GetClient = 0
End Function

Lol, I must've been drunk when I wrote this.

*sigh*

This is something I would have caught if I had only looked at my own packetlogs...
I feel like shit now. Putting you guys through so much trouble...
Topic is now... *locked* to prevent future flaming and/or namecalling -.-

[Barabajagal]

JBLS does not support Lockdown. It connects to BNLS if it doesn't have a result.

[Don Cullen]

It isn't locked.

[Edit]

Strange. I got an email from vL saying Spht responded to this thread just now. I don't see it. Probably deleted his own post. I think I'm going to turn on 'include post in emails' option now, just so people can't take back what they said.

[rabbit]

Giving logs with the packet headers would help a lot more.

[edit]
.....your mother.

Ease up, rabbit. Spht says the ultimatium applies to everyone including me, you, and BreW.

I know.  Someone helping someone else here usually starts with
1. "You're an idiot, go away"
2. "Stop ripping code"
3. "Give more information"

I went with 3, and then I added in "your mother" as a bit of fun.

[Spht]

It isn't locked.

[Edit]

Strange. I got an email from vL saying Spht responded to this thread just now. I don't see it. Probably deleted his own post. I think I'm going to turn on 'include post in emails' option now, just so people can't take back what they said.

I was going to say that today BNLS has not been replying to some of my messages at times, but then I noticed that that's not related to the problem he had.

[Don Cullen]

Giving logs with the packet headers would help a lot more.

[edit]
.....your mother.

Ease up, rabbit. Spht says the ultimatium applies to everyone including me, you, and BreW.

I know.  Someone helping someone else here usually starts with
1. "You're an idiot, go away"
2. "Stop ripping code"
3. "Give more information"

I went with 3, and then I added in "your mother" as a bit of fun.

Granted, but it could be viewed provocative and only serve to disrupt the thread, even if your intention was only to be playful.

[Don Cullen]

It isn't locked.

[Edit]

Strange. I got an email from vL saying Spht responded to this thread just now. I don't see it. Probably deleted his own post. I think I'm going to turn on 'include post in emails' option now, just so people can't take back what they said.

I was going to say that today BNLS has not been replying to some of my messages at times, but then I noticed that that's not related to the problem he had.

Think BNLS is experiencing an overflow? In that case, they should consider de-centralizing and diverting the flow (as a way of traffic control). Or perhaps BNLS isn't completely debugged...

[Edit 2] Just realized this is a double post. I really need to pay more attention. I apologize.

[brew]

Hold up! How'd this topic get un-locked? Oh well I'll leave it open this time -.-