On 19 July 2013 04:35, Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/19/13, Asif Ali Baig <dreamhealer@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: If they are not masked, because they turned it off.... does the server attempt to figure out what their masked hostname might be, and apply the channel ban or AKICK to them?
E.g. do you expand matching in the opposite direction?
Or perhaps you attempt to interpolate the non-masked version and add it as an 'invisible' banlist entry, at the time that a channel operator adds a masked hostname to the banlist.
I like your idea of an invisible banlist entry. Perhaps some sort of linked ban which the hidden +b only gets sent from server<->server and not server<->client(s). May put unnecessary burden on server, but worth looking into.
-- -JH
-- holbrook / zort / srd