incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave <w...@glark.co.uk>
Subject Re: Demo Server
Date Sat, 22 Jun 2013 18:37:50 GMT
With the current federation code, multiple wiab instances on a single 
host works fine. I've had two instances from different domains running 
on the same host (though for this scenario it might be cleaner to just 
spin up multiple virtual hosts).

I'm not sure about other xmpp servers but With Prosody multiple wiab 
instances can also share a single xmpp server. Each wiab instance is 
identified based on the component name it registers with the xmpp 
server. I configured each domain to use a different incoming federation 
port, but I believe that's actually unnecessary.

Federation works fine between both domains, and with external domains.

Ali has a few patches (needed to avoid client crashes with federated 
waves) that didn't make it to 0.4 RC3, but would probably be worthwhile 
including in a demo server. I think the aim is to include these patches 
before RC4?

In terms of discovery, the SRV dns record isn’t strictly necessary if 
your xmpp server runs on the standard port (5269) and your host can be 
located from a normal dns record for your domain (i.e. A / CNAME). 
Prosody, Openfire and I believe all xmpp servers will fallback to 
example.com:5269 if they can't find an appropriate SRV record.


Dave


On 22/06/13 17:46, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> I guess that depends on what ports we set up to use and how the federation
> works.  I suppose it might be possible depending on how discovery works.
>
> On 6/21/13 10:36 PM, "Fleeky Flanco" <fleeky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> will it be possible to run multiple experiments on one server ? i doubt it
>> but just thought i would ask.
>>
>> i would love to run a bleeding edge wave server since the one i already
>> run
>> doesnt get *that* much use.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> When the time comes, I'm prepared to have the necessary conversations to
>>> see about a VM at Apache.
>>>
>>> Upayavira
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
>>>> Yes the point would be to get federation up and running.  An
>>> providing a
>>>> place where we can deploy our new OT containers that will need to
>>>> communicate in a distributed way.
>>>>
>>>> On 6/21/13 3:35 PM, "Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak)" <stenyak@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That sounds good.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would it be interesting to apply for a VM at apache for that? I was
>>>>> thinking on doing so if/when the email bot is finished... (so that
>>> both
>>>>> email and wave discussions of the Apache Wave group can happen under
>>> the
>>>>> umbrella of Apache)
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, are you planning on enabling federation in some of those
>>> servers?
>>>>>
>>>>> Either way, thanks for the efforts.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Michael MacFadden <
>>>>> michael.macfadden@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As soon as we have a release, I am going to put the stable release
>>> on
>>>>>> two
>>>>>> servers.  One will be my personal server. Another one will be a
>>> server
>>>>>> hosted by my company.  I think we we have a couple environments up
>>> and
>>>>>> running it will help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I may be able to set up some sandboxes where we can actually
>>>>>> deploy
>>>>>> some of our experiments when we start looking at P2P / Server /
>>> Hybrid
>>>>>> OT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Saludos,
>>>>>      Bruno González
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com
>>>>> http://www.stenyak.com
>>>>
>
>


Mime
View raw message