-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Including FSSSignalDiscovered event to list of allowed events to send over EDDN #152
Comments
Localized names are already typically scrubbed from the EDDN messages, I see nothing controversial there. I see limited value in reporting USS with I would also agree with removing USS like the Combat zones (except perhaps for nonhuman combat zones) follow naturally from faction states as well - there is limited value to be gained from reporting individual combat zones to EDDN. Without body information, is resource extraction data still useful? |
There is an issue with some Now, we could just leave this event as only having If we insist on
|
Agreed.
Yes, no point to including this.
Yup, personal, and not really useful to anyone else.
Knowing how many CZ there are, and if the data is there, of what type/size, can be useful, even if you don't yet know exactly where they are. I'd leave this up to listeners to decide on the usefulness.
Again, it might be useful, so I see no reason to not include it. Someone has mentioned that perhaps some sort of batching of these events into a single message might be useful. Timing that post-jump might be tricky, but should be considered. |
Yes, the FSSSignalDiscovered can happen even before Location event at the startup, so to avoid complications (and possible incorrect values) with stuff like star system coords and name I suggest to have these properties as SHOULD rather than MUST. The batching is a MUST, to not compromise the server (I can clearly imagine that for highly populated system congested with fleet carriers, with just a few senders at the same moment the server will need to handle hundreds of HTTP requests at once instead of just a couple of requests. I guess it will be better even for the users as their machines won't be making 100+ HTTP requests at the same time. It can follow an easy mechanics in journal parsing:
|
The difficulty is useful information -- I've seen requests for this information. Even without body information it's better than nothing |
Something just mentioned on Discord is that currently Canonn gain the names (rather than just call signs) of Fleet Carriers from FSSSignalDiscovered events. Currently EDDB etc only get data with the call sign, giving no way to map them to the names. The format is a little awkward though, as you get both the name and the call sign in the same field:
|
It's easy to parse though. I certainly recommend for the specs that senders MUST NOT alter the SignalName any way. |
I also think messages should be transmitted as is with minimum changes. Receivers might want to implement some special logic to parse it. |
Confirming those 14 fields are all I have in my journals Possible formats: USS - the following may or may not appear:
Station/FC
CZ/RES/etc
Full list of
Installations/Beacons/Outposts(!)
For my reference as I don't see a list on Google, EN localized names for the non-obvious ones: $FIXED_EVENT_HIGHTHREATSCENARIO_T5; $FIXED_EVENT_HIGHTHREATSCENARIO_T6; $FIXED_EVENT_HIGHTHREATSCENARIO_T7;: Pirate Activity Detected |
Out of curiousity, have you got any with |
Nope, none |
One valuable info that can be obtained from this schema would be Nav Beacon status. { "timestamp":"2021-11-12T05:16:07Z", "event":"FSSSignalDiscovered", "SystemAddress":147949848947, "SignalName":"$MULTIPLAYER_SCENARIO42_TITLE;", "SignalName_Localised":"Nav Beacon" }
{ "timestamp":"2021-11-12T05:15:10Z", "event":"FSSSignalDiscovered", "SystemAddress":3996240546163, "SignalName":"$MULTIPLAYER_SCENARIO80_TITLE;", "SignalName_Localised":"Compromised Navigation Beacon" } |
For anyone following this and wondering if it's been forgotten, it hasn't. However I do have some concerns about the possible flood of data adding this would cause, so there are some caveats.
So, apart from anything else this is now dependent on first completing the migration to Python3. If no-one has the ability and time to assist me in verifying that #155 doesn't break any functionality or introduce regressions, then this is further dependent on implementing as many automated unit and functional tests as possible. That's a whole project in itself. |
I parsed all my journals. Of hours that have at least one FSSSignalDiscovered: Top 10: Hour FSSSignalDiscoveredCount Median: 64 If anyone else wants to measure, get your journals on a Linux-like system, then here's one way to do it:
|
The new schema has been live for many weeks now without anyone bringing up an issue, so closing this. |
It will allow EDDN listeners to:
In order to decide which fields have to be removed I analyzed all keys in all my own journals record for FSSSignalDiscovered event, here is the list with some comments:
There is also an event type that can be considered as personal information, it is missions related signals
Also please note that every jump for single player can generate more than 100 FSSSignalDiscovered events.
Additional values:
horizons
odyssey
StarSystem
StarPos
With appropriate values as in journal-v1.0.json schema.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: