Free hosting from BZBureau

[mrapple]

Now offering free hosting from BZBureau!

If you have a map that you need hosted, contact me (mrapplecomputer1) for free hosting from BZBureau!

Authors (that's you) get near full control over their maps. If you need extra permissions, contact me again.

Here are somethings that you MUST include for me to host your map. Items marked with * are necessary.

*1. A license
*2. A .bzw map file
*3. A title/name
*4. Some idea of jumping, rico, ctf, ffa, etc options
-----------------------
Everything else is optional, and if you think of extras include them and I will add them.**
-----------------------
5. Flags, how many of which kind etc
6. Servermsg (when user first connects) and Admsg (brodcasted every 15 minutes)
7. Group file
8. Help msg's/rules
9. A ban file (I have a pretty good one, don't worry)
10. A conf (this would cover most of the things above)

So if you need a host, contact mrapplecomputer1 today.

Thats all folks!

--------UPDATE--------
BZBureau.com is fully up and running! We have a website and all maps are now hosted under the bzbureau.com domain name.

If you are wondering what maps are currently playing, make sure to check out the NEW bzbureau.com for a full list!

**Some items may not be included for certain purposes

[joevano]

So what kind of connection is this on?

[mrapple]

So what kind of connection is this on?

I'm not sure as the details are being worked out, but its from the same server that bzbattleground (i think) is hosted on. So I dont think lag will be a problem .

[Bambino]

Who cares what server it's on. What is the connection, what's the up/down speed? mainly the up.

[joevano]

I'm not sure as the details are being worked out, but its from the same server that bzbattleground (i think) is hosted on. So I dont think lag will be a problem .

Isn't the cart before the horse? You should have the details worked out and nailed down BEFORE offering hosting to users. Saves everyone time and trouble if things cannot be worked out.

[mrapple]

I'm not sure as the details are being worked out, but its from the same server that bzbattleground (i think) is hosted on. So I dont think lag will be a problem .

Isn't the cart before the horse? You should have the details worked out and nailed down BEFORE offering hosting to users. Saves everyone time and trouble if things cannot be worked out.

I don't know very many details, but I can host, I am just waiting to hear what ports I should be slapping on maps. So I'll make a pile of maps until I get the port range, hopefully in the next week sometime.

[Crallion]

You should probably know what kind of connection, speed, etc. (details) the server has before you even rent a one... or whatever you did. Just my opinion. Might like to get one or two maps hosted myself...

[mrapple]

Just a little note to you all: I am going to be gone for a week (bzbureau.com:5164) with no internet

And i nailed down some details:

Download speed: 20 mbps
Upload speed: 10 mbps
Connection type: CAT5
1 gb RAM
2.0Ghz processor

hope that clears some stuff up!
and all maps are now hosted under the domain bzbureau.com

[blast]

"Connection type: CAT5" ? That's not a type of WAN connection... that's just a category of twisted-pair copper wires.

Seems like it's actually running off a Comcast connection, and not even a business one like NN has.


bzbureau.com > 69.180.173.220 > c-69-180-173-220.hsd1.mn.comcast.net

[Crallion]

I don't think that matters, as long as its fast, blast.

Thanks for the info, mrapple. I will maybe be hosting with you in the future... once I finish my new map.

Who is NN? I'm trying to think...

[blast]

I don't think that matters, as long as its fast, blast.

Yes, it does matter. The quality of the bandwidth is a lot different when you compare a residential internet connection to one at a datacenter. I'm also wonder if that is the "advertised" speeds, or if that was determined through a bandwidth testing site. Comcast residential connections have something called PowerBoot that could technically inflate a bandwidth test.

[joevano]

Also, overusing bandwidth on a residential connection can tick off the internet gods (Comcast especially). When they get mad (because of overusage on an unlimited account, yeah I know) you may just find yourself without an internet provider. There are plenty of "Comcast cut off my internet" stories out there, a simple Google search should be sufficient. You really need to read the "terms of use" that your provider publishes to get an idea of what is and what is not allowed on your connection (http://www.comcast.net/terms/use/). As you can see in the Comcast Residential terms, running a BZFlag server is disallowed by:

Technical Restrictions
* use or run dedicated, stand-alone equipment or servers from the Premises that provide network content or any other services to anyone outside of your Premises local area network (“Premises LAN”), also commonly referred to as public services or servers. Examples of prohibited equipment and servers include, but are not limited to, e-mail, Web hosting, file sharing, and proxy services and servers;

So running a BZFlag server on a home connection, especially if it becomes popular, could put you at risk of losing your provider.

[Crallion]

Ok, point taken.

[allejo]

Blast: Yes bzbureau is running off NN's server. I gave apple access to the server hence, him hosting off nn's server. Just to clarify that point.

[blast]

Then why does bzbureau.com not point to one of NN's IP addresses? In fact, it's not even pointing to an IP in the same state. The bzbureau.com IP is from Minnesota while the bzfmaps.net IP is from Pennsylvania. (Also, the IP for bzfmaps.net resolves back to 74-94-43-194-Philadelphia.hfc.comcastbusiness.net which reflects the fact that it is a business account.)

[joevano]

Blast: Yes bzbureau is running off NN's server. I gave apple access to the server hence, him hosting off nn's server. Just to clarify that point.

To clarify even more. mrapplecomputer1 is NOT hosting maps on NN's server (even if he does have access). Bzbureau.com is pointed at a server in Minnesota and bzfmaps.net (NN's server) is pointed at a server in Pennsylvania. So it would seem the server is in two different locations on two different classes of Comcast internet, or they are two totally separate servers in two totally different locations. My guess is the latter.

[Swigg]

With all the free hosting provided by existing map hosters like Abominable, Bzexcess, norang and BzTank, do we really need a new hoster?

[Crallion]

Swigg: Is there a problem with someone wanting to contribute? You can never have enough servers. For instance, I saw a topic where someone wanted a server near australia/New Zealand. This server is, obviously, not in that area, but the more servers there are, the more maps can be hosted. Every contribution to an open source community is a good one. (that is, contributions that aren't meant to be detrimental)

[Swigg]

Problem? No. Mother necessity is the question. If you look on listserv there are often 300+ servers up. We would be doing well if we had 300 players logged in. Look at how many maps never have a single player in months. In actuality we only need maybe like 20 servers total. I guess it would be nice to have a server in New Zealand, but almost no players are from there.

The map hosts I mentioned above have properly configured servers and have dedicated high bandwidth connections. All the grunt work has been done. The most popular servers are Bzexcess, BzTank, Norang, Mofo and BzBattleground. Apart from the GU league servers you could remove ALL of the others and for the most part we would never miss them at all, much less even realize that they are gone. Think of how much faster listserv would load with all the excess and underplayed servers removed. For the most part there are a bunch of servers with owners that can say "Hey! I have a server" what they leave out is "Hey! I have no players."

The best chance of success for a new map is to go with a tried and true host, then branch off if and only if the map becomes popular. People trust the old guard and for very good reasons.

I'm not trying to create an argument or be abrasive or insult anyone but the facts are the facts. Server quantity is not the issue; It's server quality. You could have the best map running but with a lousy host and no players it would be like hanging a masterpiece painting in a broom closet for no one to see.

*** As a footnote, if there is a map anyone wants hosted on a high bandwidth server, PM me and I can have it up in minutes***

I have at my disposal:

1) A reliable server in a datacenter on a famous host.
2) An excellent server owner who was gracious enough to give me upload perms.
3) A reliable admin team.
4) A good IP/hostban list.
5) The ability to promote the map to get players actually playing.

-'Nuff said

-Swigg

[Crallion]

If people weren't free to host their own maps and get them out on the server list, even they're not that great, then the development process of maps would begin to slow down, maybe even stagnate.

[Spazzy McGee]

If people weren't free to host their own maps and get them out on the server list, even they're not that great, then the development process of maps would begin to slow down, maybe even stagnate.

Stagnate, my foot. It was not so long ago that these kind of hosting services were not available. I'd say then we had a much better great-to-crap map ratio. That's just my opinion though.

In any case, I don't see much much point in arguing about this server's speed/performance issues - It's never going to have any players to support anyway.

[Crallion]

Stagnate, my foot. It was not so long ago that these kind of hosting services were not available. I'd say then we had a much better great-to-crap map ratio. That's just my opinion though.

Yes, the "great-to-crap" ratio may have been better, but you also have to add the number of maps to the equation. If there were 10 "greats" and 70 "craps", that would be 1-7. Now if there are 20 "greats" and 200 "craps", that would be 1-10. So yes, the ratio was better. But there are probably a larger amount of great maps, therefore making it worth having more maps. I don't give a crap about the ratios.

(of course, those numbers were completely made up to illustrate my point. They are by no means accurate)

[Abominable]

There's no need for another hoster, IMO. I understand wanting to put "yours" in for bzflag, but being another hoster, isn't the way to go. 90% of bzflag servers aren't even played, why add to that 90%? There are already many other "free" hosters. Zaphod, nn, ash3, myself. I would be more the willing, just as any other host, to put up a map for bzmap makers, there's no need to add to the long list of free hosters as far as I can see.

[blast]

I don't really see a problem with another free host, as long as the quality of the service is high. I have actually temporarily suspended my free hosting (with a few exceptions) since I could not maintain the quality level that I felt was necessary.

[mrapple]

I am sorry, I can't write more but I only have one bar of edge service up here at my cabin.

1. I am hosting this from a new server! **see update above**

That's about all. I'll be putting up maps when I get back from my cabin on Saturday.