+ignore [solved]

[gemeau50]

+ignore <hostmask> [%<XdXhXm>] [comment]
Adds a hostmask to the ignore list, with your nickname, optional comment and ignoretime.
This command can be used to either ignore users on irc,
or to ignore incoming telnet connections.
Ignoretime has to be expressed in days, hours and/or minutes.

In order to stop flooders trying to flood my bot, I used the +ignore command as follows:
.+ignore *!*@xx.*

Then, we noticed that while the bot was recording the arrival of users within that network, it wasn't logging any text for those users.

Is there a way that I can use the +ignore command in order to stop users to contact my bot while the bot would still be able to log what such users are sending to the channel?

Tx in advance

[Zircon]

There is no command buit-in in eggdrop to allow you that. That s why in this case i use The IRC command Silence.

Code: Select all

.dump Silence *!*@xx.*

To remove the silence:

Code: Select all

.dump -Silence *!*@xx.*

And you have to be owner to be able to use .dump.

[nml375]

Might be worth noting that the "silence" irc command is not standardized, and is only available on some servers/irc-networks...

[Zircon]

You are right nml375, i use it on Undernert, and i know it exists on Dalnet, but dont know about the other networks.

[Alchera]

and i know it exists on Dalnet, but dont know about the other networks.

If it exists on DALnet then it's the best kept secret of the 21st Century.

On DALnet, to prevent a lot of rubbish, we set our user mode +R.

[Zircon]

But i think on Dalnet, the +R ignore the nicks that arent registred. What if the annoying nickname is registred ? Here is more information about Silence :
http://docs.dal.net/docs/misc.html#1

[Alchera]

But i think on Dalnet, the +R ignore the nicks that arent registred. What if the annoying nickname is registred ? He is more information about Silence :
http://docs.dal.net/docs/misc.html#1

I missed that information when I checked earlier today.

On DALnet only an idiot that is flooding &c uses a registered nick; we also have the use of +M as a good channel mode.

The odd foolish person using a registered nick when flooding etc gets reported and usually a-killed immediately (or is watched for further abuse).

The advantage of ignore (over silence) is that it's permanent.

[nml375]

Just one thing though..
If using silence, would'nt that prevent the desired logging aswell?

I am abit uncertain what the author refers to with "contacting" the bot.. DCC-chat? ctcp-floods?
(Properly configured eggie should handle either of those fairly well..)

[Zircon]

I am abit uncertain what the author refers to with "contacting" the bot.. DCC-chat? ctcp-floods?
(Properly configured eggie should handle either of those fairly well..)

Silence is done in the server side, so if we put a Silence on *!*@*, no1 can /dcc chat botnick or /ctcp botnick chat or any type of ctcp. At least, this is the case on undernet. However, on undernet, you can set exceptions with silence, like :

Code: Select all

 /silence *!*@*,~*!*@*.users.undernet.org

make the bot ignore every1, but receive messages from people who are logged in to X and set to usermode +x

[nml375]

So it would indeed block the logging the author wanted to keep...

[gemeau50]

Silence is done in the server side, so if we put a Silence on *!*@*, no1 can /dcc chat botnick or /ctcp botnick chat or any type of ctcp. At least, this is the case on undernet. However, on undernet, you can set exceptions with silence, like :

Code: Select all

 /silence *!*@*,~*!*@*.users.undernet.org

make the bot ignore every1, but receive messages from people who are logged in to X and set to usermode +x

It is true that you can't DCC nor CTCP the bot while in silence but it can be reached by telnet.

As far as the exception to the silence command on Undernet, I never heard nor read anything about it but it does work. TX

So it would indeed block the logging the author wanted to keep...

While /ignore does interfere with what is happening in a channel, /silence doesn't on Undernet.

[Alchera]

(Properly configured eggie should handle either of those fairly well..)

Exactly!

[Alchera]

While /ignore does interfere with what is happening in a channel, /silence doesn't on Undernet.

Same on DALnet. The use of /silence is ineffectual and useless.

[Zircon]

While /ignore does interfere with what is happening in a channel, /silence doesn't on Undernet.

Same on DALnet. The use of /silence is ineffectual and useless.

I disagree completely. I think you didnt get the real utility of silence. The major utlity of Silence over Ignore is that it stops everything private but nothing public. So when your bot is flooded on private by floodbots, if you just /ignore them, you cant see their floods on the channel, and then you will take no action to lock the channel....Silence allow you to ignore anything private, but still be able to see what is happening in the channel, and that s what the author of this thread asked for.

Second, Silence is done on the server side, means that the server dont even try to send you the messages, good for the lag, more efficiency over the bandwidth, ad eggies cant handle any private/ctcp message when silence is ON, coz they see nothing.

I personnally use a little script based on silence, to ignore *!*@* for 2 minutes in case of a private botnet flood, and it s far more efficient than /ignore.

[Alchera]

I tested /silence on a bot in a trivia channel. The test was particular to a script error created because of another bots trivia script (some characters caused parsing errors).

I reiterate my previous statement that (in this case) /silence "is ineffectual and useless".

The use of ignore still seems to be a far better tool.