'Local' Chaining

Yeah, I've done it before - it just seems overly complex with the IPs, ports and one being selected as a server - it tends to take me a few attempts and if you get it wrong have to go through the entire sim setup again. So this request is mostly borne from laziness on my part!

Would it be possible to make an easier way of chaining two sims together on a single PC rather than through a network?

Splodge in post 119592 said:

Would it be possible to make an easier way of chaining two sims together on a single PC rather than through a network?

The two simulations would still need to communicate. I don't know if Windows provides a separate inter-process communication channel other than TCP/IP. Even if it does, adding it would be a significant effort for a very marginal (IMO) gain.

I could imagine a few minor changes, such as a "this machine" button or having the server leave a note of what it is and which port it's on somewhere so they can be autofilled on the client, but I can't see doing much more than that.

Splodge in post 119592 said:

Would it be possible to make an easier way of chaining two sims together on a single PC rather than through a network?

The two simulations would still need to communicate. I don't know if Windows provides a separate inter-process communication channel other than TCP/IP. Even if it does, adding it would be a significant effort for a very marginal (IMO) gain.

I could imagine a few minor changes, such as a "this machine" button or having the server leave a note of what it is and which port it's on somewhere so they can be autofilled on the client, but I can't see doing much more than that.

To address one of the OPs comments, would it be possible to allow any sim to pause if the chain address is the local address?

clive in post 119598 said:

Splodge in post 119592 said:

Would it be possible to make an easier way of chaining two sims together on a single PC rather than through a network?

The two simulations would still need to communicate. I don't know if Windows provides a separate inter-process communication channel other than TCP/IP. Even if it does, adding it would be a significant effort for a very marginal (IMO) gain.

I could imagine a few minor changes, such as a "this machine" button or having the server leave a note of what it is and which port it's on somewhere so they can be autofilled on the client, but I can't see doing much more than that.

There are named pipes (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/ipc/named-pipes). Technically they are streams but can be read/written with the ReadFile/WriteFile APIs. I think TCP sockets on Windows can also be used like file handles and read/written in the same way, which means they can effectively use the same code.

However, to avoid over-complicating things I imagine you can just use a local named pipe to automatically negotiate the TCP connections (like choosing port numbers).

alvinhochun in post 119600 said:

clive in post 119598 said:

Splodge in post 119592 said:

Would it be possible to make an easier way of chaining two sims together on a single PC rather than through a network?

The two simulations would still need to communicate. I don't know if Windows provides a separate inter-process communication channel other than TCP/IP. Even if it does, adding it would be a significant effort for a very marginal (IMO) gain.

I could imagine a few minor changes, such as a "this machine" button or having the server leave a note of what it is and which port it's on somewhere so they can be autofilled on the client, but I can't see doing much more than that.

There are named pipes (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/ipc/named-pipes). Technically they are streams but can be read/written with the ReadFile/WriteFile APIs. I think TCP sockets on Windows can also be used like file handles and read/written in the same way, which means they can effectively use the same code.

However, to avoid over-complicating things I imagine you can just use a local named pipe to automatically negotiate the TCP connections (like choosing port numbers).

127.0.0.1 and localhost always resolve to the local machine. Windows comes with a built in loop-back adaptor for these connection so it can be done even if you don't have a network card. Another plus is firewall does apply on this loopback adater so you can use whatever ports without and struggle. I do have some python code of running a chat server over TCP.

While we can certainly look at improving/simplifying local connections and providing switchable controls (ie pause etc), adding a whole new comms system is really not on the cards.

Mantis 26256 and 26257.

Perhaps it would be an enhancement to have a default port per sim, which both client and server understand, so that you could just say "Connect to Sim $foo" and fill in the port based on foo?

So, like, King's Cross is always (or, by default at least), 50501, so if Peterborough is trying to connect to KC it will default to 50501.

This would seem to side-step a lot of tediousness.

Going even farther a local networking mode would always bind to 127.0.0.1 and the default per-sim port, and thus the user can be spared even knowing the settings exist.