Crossplay with pokopia-native: protocol comparison and options (research)
まだ誰も着手していません。
評価
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 20/100
- issue の種類
- ドキュメント
- 明瞭さ
- 説明が足りない
- 活発さ
- 活発
- 技術スタック
- cpp
- 領域
- networking
調査の方向性
Start by reading the issue’s comparison of the Link Play stacks and its A/B/C options; it identifies no repository files or tests to inspect. The work is to decide whether crossplay is wanted and select an approach, after resolving the listed protocol, identity, security, discovery, and licensing questions.
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
説明
Read-only comparison of the Link Play ("Local connection") stacks in Dittobyte/Recompia and xFractals/pokopia-native (MIT, clone at 4a72d23, 1.3.0), and what crossplay would take.
Bottom line
The two games would interoperate at the game level (same game, same nn::ldn HLE, same LocalCommunicationVersion 301, same virtual UDP socket on port 49530), but the transport, discovery and identity/auth layers are entirely different designs. Crossplay today is impossible without one side implementing the other's protocol (A), a bridge (B), or an agreed shared protocol (C). The room-code format is already shared; the key derivation is not.
What matches, and what does not
- Matches:
nn::ldnemulation and theNetworkInfo/NodeInfothe game sees; theLocalCommunicationVersion; the virtual UDP socket on port 49530. - Differs: transport and message framing, LAN discovery, and the join/identity checks. Their build has a build-ID + mods-fingerprint gate with no analogue here; this side's session-variant has none there.
- Room code: same format, different KDF (
"pokopia-relay room v1"vs"pokopia-coop room v1"). - Security: their internet play authenticates every frame/datagram (HMAC, replay-protected); this side authenticates only the join and trusts the post-join data path.
Options
A. Our runtime speaks their protocol as a second Link Play mode. Needs their wire protocol end to end, a Linux mDNS/DNS-SD backend (theirs has none), their identity (game main build ID + mods fingerprint), and their room-code KDF. Cost: high — effectively a parallel transport stack (~3–4k lines). Risk: their Link Play is unreleased and may change.
B. A bridge process. A helper that speaks this relay protocol on one side and their coop protocol on the other, mapping one room to one session and forwarding NetworkInfo + game datagrams, and answering both identity checks. Cost: moderate; reuses both stacks. Adds a hop and a support burden, and needs a NAT/mDNS answer.
C. A shared protocol agreed by both projects. Both adopt one versioned discovery + transport + auth format. Highest coordination, lowest long-term duplication. Their Link Play is unreleased and their roadmap is their own.
Risks
- Their Link Play is "not released"; protocol, ports, DNS-SD keys and KDF may change.
- Room-code KDF mismatch: same code, different keys.
- No shared identity gate: a compatible mode must define a common compat gate or drop their check (weakening their cheat refusal).
- Security asymmetry: pick one threat model.
- License boundary: MIT is GPL-compatible, but needs attribution and a decision on vendoring vs reimplementing.
- mDNS on Linux: any option that uses their discovery needs a Linux backend.
Open questions
- Is crossplay with pokopia-native wanted at all, and at what priority (LAN first, internet later)?
- Is MIT code in the GPL tree acceptable (vendoring their coop module) vs a clean-room reimplementation vs a bridge?
- Is the game's main build ID available at runtime to supply their identity check, and would the mods-fingerprint scheme be adopted or replaced with the session-variant scheme?
- Which room-code KDF should win?
- Preferred option A / B / C, given the runtime is Windows-built but runs under Proton and any added Linux mDNS work lands in code that cannot be built locally today.
- 主要言語
- C++
- スター
- 224
- フォーク
- 0
- PR マージ指標
- 30日以内にマージされた PR はありません
環境構築
- Dockerfile・Docker Compose ファイルなし
- プルリクエストのテンプレートあり
- コントリビューションガイドを読む
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
featureJosh/Recompia のほかの issue
-
enhancement
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 74/100
featureJosh/Recompia#522 ·
-
Improve Gardeningオープンenhancement
難易度 4/5 3〜5日 初心者へのやさしさ 42/100
featureJosh/Recompia#535 ·
-
bug low priority
難易度 3/5 1〜2日 初心者へのやさしさ 52/100
featureJosh/Recompia#534 · コメント 2 件 ·
-
Game crashes multiple times at random moments | CachyOS Hyprland対応中かも @featureJosh が今日担当しました。 オープンbug
featureJosh/Recompia#533 · 担当者 1 名 ·
-
Frequent Crashes on Steam Deck: The graphics device was lost, so Pokopia must close対応中かも @featureJosh が今日担当しました。 オープンbug high priority
featureJosh/Recompia#531 · コメント 1 件 · 担当者 1 名 ·
featureJosh/Recompia の issue をすべて見る
似ている issue
-
type:bug
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 65/100
tensorflow/tflite-micro#3995 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
-
not for AI lovers
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 76/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
VT: Backend
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 82/100
contour-terminal/contour#2314 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信