Updated Map Protocol

• More layers (done in CVS by mwedel)
• Filling in rectangular areas?
  • Would greatly reduce bandwidth used when sending floors and to a lesser degree walls
  • Probably too complicated to be worthwhile
• Impliment a streaming compression protocol
  • Has been tested to be more efficent than selectively compressing large packets (map ones)
• Make use of the “map2” proposal in doc/Developers/protocol of the server source (done in CVS by mwedel)
  • It's extendability should be able to accommodate features such as these
• Send location of light sources (see Revamp Lighting)
  • Split as seperate packet possibly, but listed here as the client may still use it in display of the map

• Crossfire mailing list: server map code redo.

Just my 0.02€, but using gzip on the conenction would likely be more effective than special protocol support for rectangular areas. Likewise animations.. I analyzed a few streams and found that animation bandwidth use can be reduced to a few bytes/timestep that way. The computational effort is also comparable to implementing special protocol extensions like filling areas.

Compression would be more efficient, easier to implement and more stable. IMnsHO. pcg@goof.com