No more multiple servers on the same machine - WTF?

[WalkerDown 1]

Because of the script kid attack, we have been forced to move to the DEV branch, to discover that you CANNOT run multiple servers on the same machine.

Before BIS told us that this behavior was only about the "dedicate" server, but it's not, it affects the client mode run with -server option.

If the current DEV branch will hit the stable branch, we'll be **ed, since many of us are paying for servers that are capable of running more than a single instance.

NOTE: you can launch multiple servers, but from the second server onward the users CANNOT join (they'll stuck at joining screen).

BIS is suggesting us to install virtual machines (are you crazy? i'm going to install and configure a VM on my server potentially slowing it down to run multiple instances of the same program? To not count the fact that this will be a complete waste of HD space).

Is this a preparation to force us to buy an additional key for each server we own?

PLEASE REVERT THIS MODIFICATION OR REMOVE IT FROM THE STABLE BRANCH BEFORE IT WILL BE UPDATED.

Edited April 27, 2013 by WalkerDown

[Tankbuster 1746]

WTF indeed mate. My guys and I splashed out on a damn expensive server for this alpha and it's mostly unused now because we can only run one server on it.

[Banshee 9]

Because of the script kid attack, we have been forced to move to the DEV branch, to discover that you CANNOT run multiple servers on the same machine.

Before BIS told us that this behavior was only about the "dedicate" server, but it's not, it affects the client mode run with -server option.

In fact, Dwarden has been very verbose about all this, and he explained at several occasions in the Server Admin Channel, that in fact measure have been taken to permit to execute the game more than once. Those changes have been in DEV for a couple of weeks now. Dwarden also stated, that the private build of the dedicated server exe has that limitation as well, but won't have it forever.

If the current DEV branch will hit the stable branch, we'll be **ed, since many of us are paying for servers that are capable of running more than a single instance.

NOTE: you can launch multiple servers, but from the second server onward the users CANNOT join (they'll stuck at joining screen).

BIS is suggesting us to install virtual machines (are you crazy? i'm going to install and configure a VM on my server potentially slowing it down to run multiple instances of the same program? To not count the fact that this will be a complete waste of HD space).

Is this a preparation to force us to buy an additional key for each server we own?

The move to a virtualized environment was brought up as just a temporary solution until the dedicated server is able to run more than once. This involves some work to be done by BI.

But as the dedicated server is highly alpha and for testing only at this stage, you can't expect it to be in there yet.

Your constant accusations of BI forcing us to spend more money on their games, the accusations that BI is doing stuff just to make our life as server admins more miserable, and that they do all sorts of stuff on purpose is just not only completly counterproductive and disheartening, it is also plain wrong.

You claimed that you speak for the community. Be assured, you don't.

In case you didn't read it before your kick, I'm going to quote what I answered in that channel:

Am 27.04.13, um 18:28 hat "Banshee" geschrieben:

> Vittorio,

>

> you can stop paying for your server right now. Just stop it. Noone forces you.

> In fact you can use your server. If you have decided to rent a very expensive one because in the past you could run multiple instances on one machine, that's your business. Noone gave any guarantees. And yes, we are all spending time and money here to not only get some cool MP experience, but also to help BI making A3 an awsome MP experience since we have had a shitlot of fun playing the Arma series during the last decade.

>

> It has been repeated over and over that the security fixes (not the ones that fixed the "hacker" issues, but other fixes) prevent the game from beeing executed twice. However in the future with the dedicated server you will be able to execute more than one server per machine.

>

> Noone ever intended to leave us with the ability to only run one server per box. So there is no need for flaming, false accusations nor for that forum thread.

>

> Stuff like "the forum gestapo" and your general behaviour in this channel will get you a kick now. You are not the community. You are just a jerk that fools around.

After taking action and kicking you from that channel, I have received a lot of feedback from people thanking me for it. I have called you upon your behaviour several times, giving you the opportunity to adjust, but you didn't. So I wish you all the best with your expensive server.

Banshee

Edited April 27, 2013 by Banshee

[WalkerDown 1]

In fact, Dwarden has been very verbose about all this, and he explained at several occasions in the Server Admin Channel, that in fact measure have been taken to permit to execute the game more than once. Those changes have been in DEV for a couple of weeks now. Dwarden also stated, that the private build of the dedicated server exe has that limitation as well, but won't have it forever.

This is completely false, here's what David said on April 19th:

"only 1 instance of dedicated server / machine (ofcourse can be overcomed with VM or similar tricks)

He did not talked about the clients running -server mode.

Not only this, a day after (April 20), a user claimed of having multiple dedicate servers (notice: we were still talking about dedicate servers, because none, neither David, ever mentioned the client -server mode) running on the same machine, so David come up again with this:

btw i didn't said it's not possible to run multple instances, but by our tests running two instances or more caused crashes ...

[20/04/2013 16:51:13] david_foltyn-dwarden: but if Impulse want to share his 'trick' with You that's up to him

[20/04/2013 16:51:21] david_foltyn-dwarden: i can't just warrant it works flawlessly

So neither David was sure about this limination.. neither he known about what was happening, since the "limitation" doesn't causes any crashes: you can run multiple server, but the users "simply" cannot join the second onward (stuck on loading).

And again never and ever he has mentioned the Client, he were always talking about the dedicate server.

The April 23rd some ppl (fuzzy.bandit) starts to come asking why they started to have problems with multiple instances with the "client -server" from the DEV branch, and a guy (terox_) tried to "help" em, neither in this occasion David has come up to explain that the SAME limitation of the dedicated server were applied to the client -server.

None were knowing of it.. until today, because since of the script kid attack, many (like me) have switched temporary to the DEV branch to run their servers.. to discover that they cannot run multiple server anymore. And to conclude: now this modification is going to hit the stable branch, and so everyone will be affected.

You claimed that you speak for the community. Be assured, you don't.

I speak for myself, I "serve" the community like MANY others, providing free servers and neither asking for donations.

If ArmA has anything good, it's about the community, If you're going to disrupt it, you're automatically going to disrupt the user-base.

BIS is not providing any official servers, so all the servers you see online is from people that are running them with their own money.

After taking action and kicking you from that channel

Not sure why and who you "helped" kicking me from a public channel to be honest... i'm glad you feel better now. :)

[Banshee 9]

This is completely false, [...]

In fact he did talk about the client limitation of one instance per box and you are wrong.

He explicitly talked about the limitation that clients will only be able to be launched once per box in the future (already included into the DEV branch). The discussion at that day (around 12.04.) was mainly about the headless client but obviously also applied to the client launched with the -server switch. He also said, that the upcoming Dedicated Server might have the possibility to act as a headless client. He also said, that the dedicated server will be able to run more than once per machine.

The reason is to prevent piracy but also cheating and such. The ability to spawn as much clients as you want in fact has been a security concern.

Am 12.04.13, um 00:00 hat Dwarden geschrieben:

> and yes it was expected to happen the HC will cease to work on dev build, as i outlined the ownership check

You yourself have been aware of this very fact:

Am 18.04.13, um 16:20 hat Vittorio R geschrieben:

> attr: the protection is about JOINING a server with multiple copies (so playing with the same copy multiple times on a single server, or by using the HC client)..

And as an answer you got:

Am 18.04.13, um 17:58 hat Attridge(Ugly58) _ geschrieben:

> Artic, similar issue, ask Dwarden on that.

Also please see http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153010-The-urgent-debate-about-headless-client-in-A3-(and-HC-general-info)&p=2372140&viewfull=1#post2372140. You actually have been involved in the discussion in the Skype chat and also been active in the forum thread.

So neither David was sure about this limination.. neither he known about what was happening, since the "limitation" doesn't causes any crashes: you can run multiple server, but the users "simply" cannot join the second onward (stuck on loading).

And again never and ever he has mentioned the Client, he were always talking about the dedicate server.

See above. In fact he told us before it got introduced into the client way before it got introduced into the dedicated server.

The April 23rd some ppl (fuzzy.bandit) starts to come asking why they started to have problems with multiple instances with the "client -server" from the DEV branch, and a guy (terox_) tried to "help" em, neither in this occasion David has come up to explain that the SAME limitation of the dedicated server were applied to the client -server.

None were knowing of it.. until today, because since of the script kid attack, many (like me) have switched temporary to the DEV branch to run their servers.. to discover that they cannot run multiple server anymore. And to conclude: now this modification is going to hit the stable branch, and so everyone will be affected.

In fact a lot of people knew about this. It started in the discussion about the HC you've been part of.

I speak for myself, I "serve" the community like MANY others, providing free servers and neither asking for donations.

If ArmA has anything good, it's about the community, If you're going to disrupt it, you're automatically going to disrupt the user-base.

BIS is not providing any official servers, so all the servers you see online is from people that are running them with their own money.

And? That gives you the right to make unqualified comments and demands? We just recently bought new hardware as well. Our community payed for it and we're running a popular public server for people to enjoy. Does that qualify us for demands? No.

We all bought Arma3 and got Alpha access on top of it.

Alpha generally means that there is a lot of bugs and changes to be expected. No promisses have been made and in fact it was stated several times, that this is an Alpha, and stuff will not work as expected. So in this case it has been your private choice to buy Arma3 and participate in the Alpha. It has been your private choice to rent an expensive server. But that doesn't entitle you to demands. It entitles you to do testing and give feedback and therefore bring some influence into how the final product may look and behave. That's all.

Not sure why and who you "helped" kicking me from a public channel to be honest... i'm glad you feel better now. :)

Quite frankly you have been a pain in the ass since you joined that chatroom and as I have been told a pain in the ass in several forums as well.

Your "expert" knowledge about the codebase, about BE and all the involved mechanics lead to the point were people told you that you've been wrong several times. Yet you didn't stop to discuss stuff without a foundation, without real knowledge. That's been leading to a lot of annoyed people. The fact that this chatroom is accessible by anyone doesn't mean that the community inside that chatroom has to accept any behavior.

[WalkerDown 1]

In fact he did talk about the client limitation of one instance per box and you are wrong.

No, i'm not, David talked about the dedicate server and not about the client run in "-server" mode and I've the whole log to prove it... but the point is: why i'm still discussing this with you, since I don't even know who you are. Sorry guy, I've no time for this, i'm here to talk about the servers not to chit-chat with you (neither I think that this forum is interested of your problems).

Quite frankly you have been a pain in the ass since you joined that chatroom and as I have been told a pain in the ass in several forums as well.

And? So because i'm talking about the problems and i'm not blind by a "fanboysm" I've deserved to be banned by a guy that I don't know of, when I've asked to be there to the channel owner?

I've no time to play with you.. if you want to play "cop" it's your problem, I was there to discuss technical problems/limitations not to do the soap opera with you... if you have problems with me, feel free to contact me privately (but be advised: you'll be ignored). Now stop OT here.

Returning to the topic:

David, when it's expect us to run multiple servers again like previously? Are you working at it? A week.. a month? When? This will help us to decide whenever to "split" our machine or just wait. Thank you.

[Banshee 9]

I hate repeating myself. Around 12th of april he announced the change that clients won't be able to run several instances anymore, in effect in the Dev build. That lead to the whole discussion about the headless client not working anymore on Dev as well. That was way before we even saw a dedicated server at all.

In no stage it was possible to run several dedicated server exe at the same time and have people beeing able to conenct to both instances since the security fix that was applied to the clients are in there as well and have not yet been taken out.

Is that so hard to understand?

And yes, a client exe with the -server switch is still just a client exe that falls under the announced limitation.

[WalkerDown 1]

It seems you don't even know what we are (and we were) talking about, on the 12th David announced the introduction of the restriction that would prevent the clients with the same playerID to join a server, this is why it affected HC clients. At that time none known that the secondary side affect was about the inability to run a second server (non-HC) as well, if not for the dedicated server.

None notice about it, because in effect you were being able to run it! ...but ppl couldn't join those servers, until a the 23rd.. when the first users have noticed it, and so here we come today.

So you may repeat this to the infinite, you couldn't change the facts, but mostly important: at this point none would care about the facts, coz the DEV branch is already here and we can't change it, i'm asking:

- Is this supposed to hit the stable branch "as is" .. so we couldn't run multiple servers anymore?

- If yes (as it appears to be), when (estimated) it will be fixed? So when we could be able to run our multiple servers again?

If you didn't noticed, because of the script kid the current servers and users have dropped to the ground, and forcing server admins (who cannot apply a sort of virtualization to their machines) to run only a single server won't surely help to have different game modes, or to help the server admins (who are maintaining the community) to do their "job".

[galzohar 31]

They are obviously having issues making the dedicated server work with multiple instances on the same machine without causing issues. They haven't done this in spite, but just because that way they could let us test the other functionality of the dedicated server earlier than would otherwise be available.

Since they do plan on eventually making the dedicated servers able to run in parallel, and the limitation is only for the current test (aka alpha) version, I don't see the reason for trying to create such an uprising.

So yes, in theory, running 2 of the same process on the same machine should not cause issues. But since BIS is using some things that currently simply don't work that way, we'll just have to be patient until they can work on a solution.

In short - It's not that we don't have the ability to run multiple servers on the same machine because BIS doesn't want us to. It's simply because it is not yet functional. At least to the best of my understanding.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Yeah be patient - it's an Alpha......

[Kieran 11]

Yeah be patient - it's an Alpha......

lol i was waiting for sombody to say that :eek:

but we had mulitple servers running before without a problem? why is it we can only run one instance now?

[WalkerDown 1]

They are obviously having issues making the dedicated server work with multiple instances on the same machine without causing issues.

Unfortunately it's not about the dedicated server.. but about the client run in -server mode as well, otherwise there wouldn't be problems (since the dedicated is "privately" distributed only to who wants to participate to the testing).

In short - It's not that we don't have the ability to run multiple servers on the same machine because BIS doesn't want us to. It's simply because it is not yet functional. At least to the best of my understanding.

If it was like this I wouldn't have said a word... but the story behind it is pretty different: they hurried to try to fight the pirated copies, applying a certain limitation (it was about the playerID.. details are not interesting at this point), unfortunately this attempt had the side effect of making the HC clients not working anymore, and (we discovered only "now") the other side effect of limit the number of server running on the same machine (notice the difference: HC client <> servers).

The "fun" part (that isn't fun at all), is that the "piracy protection" have failed (in fact those crackers have circumvent this protection), and the legit users (as always) are paying the side effects for no reason. I'm criticizing also the fact the they repeated to us that "it is alpha" and so we cannot have a anti-cheat, etc; but hey, they run so fast to try to apply a anti-piracy .. so the "alpha" argumentation doesn't apply for them?

They could have applied this limitation to the dedicate server only, or revert it after they have noticed the heavy limitation it is causing, but no they decided to continue with it.. so YES, it's BIS to limit us ... it's not because it's "not yet functionality" .. since it worked so far (on the stable branch we can still run multiple servers... but unfortunately due to script kid bug exploit we cannot use them anymore, if not passworded).

What I am asking then? I'm asking them to STOP to apply random things that aren't helping them (because pirates are smarter than this), neither us (limiting the number of servers per machine means making who is supporting the community life much harder), but now they did it .. so the next question is: when it is supposed you're going to fix this bug please? For how long we have to pay for our server with a single instance on them? Thank you.

[BlenderRUS 6]

Crap!

Dont say anything about alpha state... since A3 goes public its not a "secret circle"'s game. First of all: Its PUBLIC!

It is Bohemia's decision to restrict number of instances and I'm OK with that.... but...

Too sad that no announcements about this important feature were made in changelog.

We have A3 games every weekend on 3 servers... this weekend "surprised" us and many players....

At least BIS could add this feature a little bit later when dedicated server executable is released.. and as I know some of admins already have test version of it...

[Dwarden 1125]

these changes aren't definitive! it's all WIP , Alpha ...

... so Walker ... please stop spreading non-sense , especially when being one of these who knew it before hand ...

to avoid any further misleading , speculative , wrong theories and redundant questions I wrote update of #1 post in

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?148288-Dedicated-server-status

Alpha state changes aren't definitive! it's Work-In-Progress, the aim is to offer :

1. Dedicated server to run non-dependent on STEAMclient (yet support STEAMcmd deployment)

2. Dedicated server capable run multiple binaries on same OS instance

3. ability to run at least 1 instance of Client / Dedicated Client on same OS instance where is already Dedicated Server(or Servers)

4. if possible allow multiple Dedicated Clients on same OS instance where is already Dedicated Server (or Servers)

5. if 4. possible then in the end allow to run multiple Dedicate (HeadLess) Clients (super fast network mode)

6. if possible offer both Windows and Linux binaries (atm. Test available only for Windows platform)

note:

* each instance of Client / Dedicated Client (both modes) needs unique STEAM account with the Arma 3 game ownership

note: that You can use STEAMcmd (non-GUI) https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/SteamCMD instead of STEAMclient (GUI)

Edited April 28, 2013 by Dwarden

[WalkerDown 1]

1) I'm not spreading no-sense, i'm saying (and i'm repeating): you cannot run multiple instances of the servers anymore because you wanted to introduce a anti-piracy protection (that, we must specifyc: DOES NOT WORKS), so i'm asking to revert back this modification or to correct it ASAP;

2) It must be my English, but I don't understand very well what you "added" to the fist post there, so please reply to some easy questions that can be understand by anyone (including me):

- Are we be able to run multiple DEDICATED servers on the same machine without using any virtualization or other additional setup and without purchasing additional keys?

- Are we be able to run multiple CLIENT -SERVER servers on the same machine without using any virtualization or other additional setup and without purchasing additional keys?

- If we cannot do the above anymore.. WHEN the problem will be addressed?

At the moment we are running a single instance per machine, so I want to know when we can run multiple instances without purchasing the game over and over again. Thank you.

[Dwarden 1125]

re1: read line #1 of my previous post

re2:

- point 2 of quote in my previous post

- point 3,4,5 of quote in my previous post

there is no ETA when ...

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

@WalkerDown - Look at number 2....... (and 1, you will not need a steam account to run the dedicated server executable and you will be able to download it as in Arma2)

see here: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_2:_Dedicated_Server

When the Dedicated Server executables are available you will be able to run multiple instances.......that is what you need to wait for, they aren't ready yet because it's still an Alpha.

When will it be ready? - when it's ready.

If you were hoping that you would have a fully completed MP game at Alpha release well those were unrealistic dreams, weren't they?

Do you know / understand the differences between dedicated server // dedicated client (client -server/hosted) // client?

As for the rest - read it again, he wrote it clearly.

[WalkerDown 1]

that is what you need to wait for, they aren't ready yet because it's still an Alpha.

Not sure if we are talking about the same thing.. the multiple instance per machine were working, until the DECIDED to remove it.. it's not "it's ready because it's still alpha" .. all the servers you see until the last week online were run on the same machine, until they removed this possibility, so we all stuck with "powerful" machines with only one instance on them. It's not that i'm asking to "hurry" for something that wasn't ready.. i'm asking to FIX something that were working until "yesterday...

---------- Post added at 21:12 ---------- Previous post was at 21:09 ----------

there is no ETA when ...

You have blocked all of us by running multiple servers and you don't know when you're going to fix this? And for what? To try to block pirate copies.. but failing at doing so.

The ones who are paying this decision aren't those "pirates".. but the legit users.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

As I suspected you don't know the difference between the various server types.

They removed multiple instances of dedicated client because of cheating/piracy, so wait for the dedicated server executable (arma3server.exe) which will give you what you want and is the more usual way of running multiple instances in Arma.

Arma3 is not complete yet - as it didn't have an arma3server.exe anyone with any sense didn't rush out and rent an expensive server. You need to do your research and understand what you are doing before you jump in with both feet.

Edited April 28, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[WalkerDown 1]

As I suspected you don't know the difference between the various server types.

As I suspected you don't know what we're talking about (and we had two pages of posts...):

Instead of applying a anti-piracy "experiment" that is not working (instead, it is damaging the legit users), they should have waited to fix the dedicated server (at least about the multiple instances part), BEFORE deciding to apply this heavy limitation. But they wanted to rush to apply a crap protection that is not helping anyone (nor them to sell more; neither us to run our servers), do not count the fact that they didn't informed anyone about this. Did you read about a SITREP? Did you read a official post here on the forum about the multiple server instances (default branch), do you don't.. until today.

This is had nothing to do with the "alpha", we all know this is alpha. This is more about their decisions without thinking at the consequences.

Makes sense? No? I don't know how to explain it better than this. And yes, at this point we can't do anything better than waiting for them to fix it, since they have broken it already.

(PS: and no, they did not "removed multiple instances...".. they did something else, but it won't make much difference)

[mrnemesis 11]

If possible please could I have a definite Yes/No to will the next alpha branch update force me to run a single -server instance on my server? Or will the dedicated server binary be released with the ability to run multiple servers?

Some context, I run the Aussie Day0.com.au community and we have 5 servers and being forced to a single instance will pretty much shut this community down. Before the masses throw in the 'it's alpha' comment, this implementation shows a development process out of touch with sane community management practises. The ArmA 3 community has suffered a serious blow due to the actions of the latest hack and adding a mad restriction like this to the main alpha branch is suicide.

Seriously guys hold off on these changes until you can deploy a dedicated server binary that can handle multiple instances.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

@WalkerDown

There is no dedicated server.exe for Windows or Linux yet, the -server startup parameter is a temporary workaround until the dedicated server executables are finished. You can't really expect or demand 100% functionality in an alpha. There were bound to be occasional problems during the development.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[Tankbuster 1746]

@WalkerDown

There is no dedicated server.exe for Windows ~ yet.

I'm looking at mine right now. WD's point is that we used to be able to run concurrent servers on the one OS and now we can't. I rather hoped that getting the server.exe would fix that, but it didn't.

[WalkerDown 1]

If possible please could I have a definite Yes/No to will the next alpha branch update force me to run a single -server instance on my server? Or will the dedicated server binary be released with the ability to run multiple servers?

Yes, the next stable branch (not DEV) update, that should be out this week, will keep all the current (DEV) modification, so you'll be forced to run a SINGLE instance on the same machine. You cannot run multiple servers (nor client -server; neither by using the "private" dedicate server) anymore.

This is all about this thread. :)

---------- Post added at 08:56 ---------- Previous post was at 08:50 ----------

@WalkerDown

There is no dedicated server.exe for Windows or Linux yet, the -server startup parameter is a temporary workaround until the dedicated server executables are finished. You can't really expect or demand 100% functionality in an alpha. There were bound to be occasional problems during the development.

Herm.. i'm not sure if you are updated, but we're using the dedicated server by a while already :) ...but this is not about the dedicated server, or to be exact it is related: we would have liked to have a working (multiple instances) dedicated server, BEFORE this restriction would have applied to the stable branch, especially because this "anti-piracy" thing is not working, so you can imagine the frustration of having a restriction applied for no reason... because they wanted to rush without thinking at the consequences affecting the legit users.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I'm looking at mine right now. WD's point is that we used to be able to run concurrent servers on the one OS and now we can't. I rather hoped that getting the server.exe would fix that, but it didn't.

Update everyday and frequently swap between DEV and Stable - no server.exe here - should I have one?

I wasn't included in those participating in the limited release and didn't get a bootleg copy emailed to me either lol.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari