robotbob Report post Posted October 22, 2006 Hello all, I have begun creating a bot (in assembler) and have examine the very nice example bots available and the current source tree of the el client. My question is there a *Bot Protocol Whitepaper* I could get. Granted I will create and finish the bot with the client as my only example, but it would make the task easier if I had something similair to an RFC for the expected data sent and received. I've created POP3\SMTP clients and grocery list of socket apps, and all of these where made quite easy with an RFC. (and btw once done, ill port it to several languages and GPL it) Thanks in advance, robotbob (aka Eric Asbell ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Learner Report post Posted October 22, 2006 Hello all, I have begun creating a bot (in assembler) and have examine the very nice example bots available and the current source tree of the el client. My question is there a *Bot Protocol Whitepaper* I could get. Granted I will create and finish the bot with the client as my only example, but it would make the task easier if I had something similair to an RFC for the expected data sent and received. I've created POP3\SMTP clients and grocery list of socket apps, and all of these where made quite easy with an RFC. (and btw once done, ill port it to several languages and GPL it) Thanks in advance, robotbob (aka Eric Asbell ) No such document exists. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
robotbob Report post Posted October 22, 2006 No such document exists. Well a shame. I will then need to create one during development. It strikes me as odd , given the: *number of bots *length of time the project has existed. I'll just use a packet capture to ensure I am emulating the client properly. robotbob Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Learner Report post Posted October 22, 2006 No such document exists. Well a shame. I will then need to create one during development. It strikes me as odd , given the: *number of bots *length of time the project has existed. I'll just use a packet capture to ensure I am emulating the client properly. robotbob Most people look at the Client code instead of worrying about the packet capture. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
robotbob Report post Posted October 22, 2006 Most people look at the Client code instead of worrying about the packet capture. its actually easier for me at least. Instead of wading through a ton of sprintf and other c calls. The main reason is the language I use, the raw data is far more useful than the C blobs of ascii formating. Much like creating a Unrar program but you told "everyone just looks at <name> unrar client" instead of reading a format doc for the rar file format. The way i will handle the bytes to send and parse is far different than a C programmer will do. Ok fine enough, I just do it as I planned. Eric Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Learner Report post Posted October 22, 2006 Most people look at the Client code instead of worrying about the packet capture. its actually easier for me at least. Instead of wading through a ton of sprintf and other c calls. The main reason is the language I use, the raw data is far more useful than the C blobs of ascii formating. Much like creating a Unrar program but you told "everyone just looks at <name> unrar client" instead of reading a format doc for the rar file format. The way i will handle the bytes to send and parse is far different than a C programmer will do. Ok fine enough, I just do it as I planned. Eric The reason to look at the C code is that most of the packets send a simple structure and you can watch where it grabs each value and what it gets used for, and it is usually done in order. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
robotbob Report post Posted October 22, 2006 The reason to look at the C code is that most of the packets send a simple structure and you can watch where it grabs each value and what it gets used for, and it is usually done in order. Ok. I understand. its just a language thing. What a C programmer sees as a struct, is a linear chunk of bytes to me. Its just faster (for me) to see the raw bytes instead of a language abstracted data type. I'll look at both, and I will make available the docs I make for those who are used to the approach I take. In C you array[0][1] things, but I need to think in terms of index and displacement as in ( packet is has a dword header 4 bytes, second dword pointer to an ascii buffer, etc...) (Sidebar: I am comfortable with C, the first language I learn 15 yrs ago, but I am a much faster guy in assembly for parsing any sort of data) Thanks for your help learner Hopefully the contributions I make are helpful. robotbob (eric) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Placid Report post Posted October 22, 2006 I think a protocol whitepaper would be an excellent thing to have, so please share it when you're done Share this post Link to post Share on other sites