CrimsonGuy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:34 pm Was looking for something like these, but anim8 doesn´t seem to be compatible with Love 0.11.X

So far things seem to be working fine with 11.x. Try the demo branch.

The idea of having the clients send the server its own IP address sounds pretty insecure to me. The opposite doesn't sound too bad, though a rogue server could use that for DDoSing a machine. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the client and server both know each other's IP addresses simply beca...

No, the string being sent is "promo". "255.255.255.255" is the broadcast address.

1) You said do not use setpeername at the client. Why? It feels wrong/bad to use sendto instead of "binding" the socket and then simply use send. Should be a slight performance gain, too. This one I honestly don't know the answer to. For some reason, I was getting an error with setpeernam...

I got it working by taking out the "if connected" code and using "0.0.0.0" instead of "*". Check out the attached files.

The assert(udp:sendto("promo", "255.255.255.255", clientPort)) Does not work. It produces an error that says that the specified host (I guess the broadcast address) is unknown. Same error with your files. So it seems to be device/OS dependend? Using love 11.1 on Windows 10. I'm ...

Sorry, where is host unknown?

I attached the code that seems to be working for me.

I've been using anim8. It has a very simple API without losing flexibility. Kudos to kikito.

A few things: 1. You can't use the same port for client and server on the same host. You need a separate clientPort for the client (and broadcast to this port from the server). 2. In the client you need to use: udp:setsockname("*", clientPort) 3. Don't use udp:setpeername in the client.

Some questions in advance: What exactly is the meaning of the "*" in sock:setsockname("*", 55555) ? The "*" lets the socket know to accept messages from all interfaces. For example, if you used "127.0.0.1" instead of "*", it would only accept messag...