11 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
If that last line is the one where it says not to remove it unless asked, go ahead and remove it. That setting should only be toggled by the code when you connect for the first time, which the logs on Server01 say never actually happened.
12 Mar, 2007, kiasyn wrote in the 22nd comment:
Votes: 0
Conner said:
FWIW, I find the best results with server02 myself.
server03 ftw!
12 Mar, 2007, Davion wrote in the 23rd comment:
Votes: 0
I'm going to have to go with server01 > all. Seeing as the server is hosted on the very VPS that MudBytes is on, should it go down only bad things will happen. But so far so good! (185 day uptime! :D)
13 Mar, 2007, Conner wrote in the 24th comment:
Votes: 0
kiasyn said:
Conner said:
FWIW, I find the best results with server02 myself.
server03 ftw!


Davion said:
I'm going to have to go with server01 > all. Seeing as the server is hosted on the very VPS that MudBytes is on, should it go down only bad things will happen. But so far so good! (185 day uptime! :D)


Ok, but you two are a bit biased. :wink:

From my own experience, not being hosted on any of the servers in question and from talking to other mud admins who have tried the three servers, server02 seems the most likely to connect consistantly without problems. All too often, even if there's obviously nothing wrong with server01 or server03, both of those report that they are unreachable.
13 Mar, 2007, kiasyn wrote in the 25th comment:
Votes: 0
really? when does this happen ive never seen it.
13 Mar, 2007, Conner wrote in the 26th comment:
Votes: 0
I don't exactly bother to log it myself, Kiasyn, but the next time I see it, I'll let you know.
13 Mar, 2007, Kayle wrote in the 27th comment:
Votes: 0
I just think Samson's cooler than both Kiasyn and Davion, so I stick with Server02.
13 Mar, 2007, Conner wrote in the 28th comment:
Votes: 0
Yes, well, there is that too.. :wink:
13 Mar, 2007, Guest wrote in the 29th comment:
Votes: 0
It shouldn't make any difference which server you connect to. They all work just fine. If you're having trouble connecting, open a topic here and provide some information and then we can help.

Noplex had issues getting hooked up and with the information he was able to provide we determined there was a bug in the join code on the intermud page. Supplying an invalid configuration file. Technically a problem that could have been avoided by just using the IMC client itself to connect with. But the issue was found and resolved and hopefully won't come up again for people who use that method to connect.

It's not possible to act on vague "I can't connect" messages.
21 May, 2007, Caius wrote in the 30th comment:
Votes: 0
I've run into something similar that may, or may not be useful to share.

I connected my mud to server01 under the name SW:TotJ. Later I disconnected, changed the name to SW_TotJ, and connected again. At this point SW_TotJ showed up on imclist as connected, while SW:TotJ showed up in red. Shortly thereafter I changed back to SW:TotJ, but when I now tried connecting my mud froze in the manner described often in this thread. Currently my mud freezes if I try to connect under either of these names.

I hope this information can be used for something. I also hope that I can connect as SW:TotJ soon again. Will these be purged from the server at some point, so I can connect? Or must they be removed manually by the server admin?
21 May, 2007, Caius wrote in the 31st comment:
Votes: 0
Silly me. All I had to do was an imcrefresh.
21 May, 2007, Conner wrote in the 32nd comment:
Votes: 0
I know, in my case, I've tried changing servers before (very infrequently) resulting in this sort of issue (far less frequently) but I've never changed the name my mud uses for connecting to IMC at all. *shrug*
20.0/32