I am looking to implement WebSocket communication via ejabberd xmpp server...
The only module that I have found so far is this repository:
ejabberd-websockets
This repository has not been updated for 4 year so I do not feel very comfortable using it.
Any alternatives or reviews on above mentioned repository?
From ejabberd 15.03 version, WebSockets are fully supported, as stated here:
ejabberd 15.03 released, with Websockets support
You could also try node-xmpp-bosh which is a node.js based connection manager that sits in front of the XMPP server and handles BOSH and XMPP over WebSockets. The XMPP server sees all traffic as standard XMPP traffic.
I know that the BOSH part works well, but haven't tried WebSockets.
Related
I have a process that runs in California that wants to talk to a process in New York, using Stomp over Websockets.
Also note that my process is not a web app, but I implemented a stomp over websocket client in C++, in order to connect things up to my backend. Maybe this was or wasn't a good idea. So, I want my client to talk to the server and subscribe, where their client pushed messages.
I was implementing my own server when I saw that ApacheMQ supported Stomp over Websockets. So, I started reading the docs.
It says with the last line under 'configuration' at
http://activemq.apache.org/websockets :
One thing worth noting is that web sockets (just as Ajax) implements ? > the same origin policy, so you can access only brokers running on the > same host as the web application running the client.
it says it again in several related searches such as http://sensatic.net/activemq/activemq-54-stomp-over-web-sockets.html
Is this a limitation of the server or the web client?
With that limitation, if I understand right, the server is not going to accept websocket connections from a client, of any kind, that is not on the same machine?
I am not sure I see the point of that...
If that is indeed its meaning, then how do I get around it in order to implement my scenario?
I've not found that bit of documentation you are referring to but from what I know of the STOMP implementation on the broker this seems incorrect. There shouldn't be any limit to the transport connector accepting connect requests from an outside host by default and I don't think the browser treats the websocket requests the same as it does other things like an Ajax case in terms of the same origin policy.
This probably a case that is best checked by actually trying it to see if it works, I've connected just fine from outside the same host using AMQP over websockets on ActiveMQ so I'd guess the STOMP stack should also work fine.
I'm reading up on SockJS node server. Documentation says:
Often WebSockets don't play nicely with proxies and load balancers. Deploying a SockJS server behind Nginx or Apache could be painful. Fortunately recent versions of an excellent load balancer HAProxy are able to proxy WebSocket connections. We propose to put HAProxy as a front line load balancer and use it to split SockJS traffic from normal HTTP data.
I'm curious if anyone can expand on the problem that is being solved by HAProxy in this case? Specifically:
Why websockets don't play nice with proxies and load balancers?
Why deploying Sockjs sever behind Apache is painful?
1. Why websockets don't play nice with proxies and load balancers?
I'd recommend you read this article on How HTML5 Web Sockets Interact With Proxy Servers by Peter Lubbers. It should cover everything you need to know about WebSocket and proxies - and thus, load balancers.
2. Why deploying Sockjs sever behind Apache is painful?
There is a module for handling WebSocket connections but at present Apache doesn't natively support WebSocket, nor does it look like it will any time soon based on this bug filed on apache - HTML5 Websocket implementation. The suggestion is that it actually fits the module pattern better.
So, it's "painful" simply because it's not easy - there's no official support and therefore it doesn't have the community use that it otherwise may have.
There may also be other pains in the SockJS has HTTP-based fallback transports. So you need to proxy both the WebSocket connections (using the apache-websocket module) and also HTTP requests when fallback is used.
Related to this: Nginx v1.3 was released in February with WebSocket support.
I'm experimenting with mqttjs and websockets and I wish to be able to send messages from a webpage using websockets without a bridge to an MQTT broker that is run by mqttjs. I can't find any information if this is available or even possible.
I've looked at mosquitto and they have "experimental" websocket support and I would love to find a Node.JS MQTT broker which could offer the same.
Thus far I got the communication working with pywebsocket and Socket.IO. I would really appreciate pointers in any direction if it is possible to use websockets to mqtt without bridging.
Thanks.
Is old question but is good to share my findings.
You can use the mosca broker that is written in node.js and is using mqtt.js
The mosca is supporting classic mqtt connection and mqtt over WS :
MQTT-over-Websockets
Mosca can operate in two modes: Standalone and as a node.js module.
In general mosca can support many types of brokers:
Mosca-advanced-usage
HiveMQ supports native websockets, which means you can use any Javascript MQTT library (like Eclipse Paho.js with websockets. It's perfectly possible to connect some clients vie websockets and other clients via standard TCP connection. The websocket support is stable and used in production.
The only drawback for you could be that HiveMQ is not written in Node.JS.
Disclosure: I am one of the developers of HiveMQ.
sorry for my dumb question, now that i got that i must use Javascript to use Websocket, this is client-side, but what about Serverside, why do i find people talking about RabbitMQ, Stomp, SocketIO, Tornadio
in the Tornado example, no one of them exists, so i said that Tornado is enough, but i found that people use them even with Tornado, here and here.
So what do i use? and for what?
Actually Tornado is a web-server and it supports web-sockets. Other things in your post are not webservers.
RabbitMQ is a message queue service, it's used to communicate between different services on the server
STOMP is a protocol to work with message queues.
Socket.IO is a framework that allows you to use websockets easily. But it requires Node.JS server on the server side. Socket.IO provides you some fallbacks if browser do not support WS protocol. Tornadio is a port of Socket.IO to Tornado. So you can use the same client framework (in web-browser) but on server-side you use Tornado instead of NodeJS.
So Tornado is enough for websockets. But if you'd like to create more complex apps you'll have to use other tools for other tasks. From your list - you can use Tornadio to deal with legacy browsers and RabbitMQ for interprocess communication on your server
Has anyone developed an open source SPDY proxy?
I can't find one via Google, but I believe the Amazon Silk browser uses one?
I wrote SPDY reverse proxy called shrpx in C/C++.
It also serves as SSL/SPDY proxy with squid as backend server.
The SPDY proxy has been implemented in jetty:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/spdy-dev/and5OLY4AsI
We've finished the basic documentation which can be found here:
http://www.eclipse.org/jetty/documentation/current/spdy-configuring-proxy.html
The proxy is now also able to receive SPDY and talk plain HTTP to an upstream server to terminate SPDY on the frontend servers for example.
Jetty SPDY does not provide directly a SPDY proxy, but provides both SPDY client and SPDY server functionalities - in Java - that are needed to build a proxy.
We may be working on a SPDY proxy in the next future.