Hi all, i need help to finish my new server.

john smith · #1 05-11-2010, 03:34 PM

i have this in my server log:

[Debug] [WORLD__CLIENT] New connection from 90.29.127.214:58965
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: First opcode 0x4dd0 did not match expected 0x2792
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: Tried patch 6.2_world, and it did not match.
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: First opcode 0x4dd0 did not match expected 0x2ec9
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: Tried patch 6.2_zone, and it did not match.
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: First opcode matched 0x4dd0 and length matched 464
[Debug] [NET__IDENTIFY] Identified stream 90.29.127.214:58965 with signature Titanium_world
[Debug] [WORLD__CLIENT] Checking inbound connection 90.29.127.214 against BannedIPs table
[Debug] [WORLD__CLIENT] Connection 90.29.127.214 PASSED banned IPs check. Processing connection.

Looks like problem with patch 6.2, can explain my problem?

**Derision** · #2 05-11-2010, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by john smith

i have this in my server log:

[Debug] [WORLD__CLIENT] New connection from 90.29.127.214:58965
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: First opcode 0x4dd0 did not match expected 0x2792
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: Tried patch 6.2_world, and it did not match.
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: First opcode 0x4dd0 did not match expected 0x2ec9
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: Tried patch 6.2_zone, and it did not match.
[Debug] [NET__IDENT_TRACE] 90.29.127.214:58965: First opcode matched 0x4dd0 and length matched 464
[Debug] [NET__IDENTIFY] Identified stream 90.29.127.214:58965 with signature Titanium_world
[Debug] [WORLD__CLIENT] Checking inbound connection 90.29.127.214 against BannedIPs table
[Debug] [WORLD__CLIENT] Connection 90.29.127.214 PASSED banned IPs check. Processing connection.

Looks like problem with patch 6.2, can explain my problem?

That is normal. The server is trying to identify which version of the EQ client you are using (6.2, Titanium, SoF, SoD, etc.). It checked for the 6.2 version first and didn't get a match, then it checked for Titanium and got a match and carried on as normal.

john smith · #3 05-11-2010, 05:13 PM

ok for the patch 6.2 thx for details.

I update my db with latest svn/sql and i redownload MAPS but i have exactly the same logs...

Kobaz · #4 05-11-2010, 05:35 PM

Have you set the password in the variables table to match that in your config file?

john smith · #5 05-11-2010, 06:03 PM