Hello all,
Is BOSH support on the roadmap?
It doesn't appear that it is present on the website roadmap list.
This would be great.
Thanks,
Matt
Hey Matt,
Hello all,
Is BOSH support on the roadmap?
No, not currently.
It doesn't appear that it is present on the website roadmap list.
This would be great.
Why?
Emil
--sent from my mobile
···
On 11 Nov 2013 21:48, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
The main reason is so that packets can get through layer 7 inspection
proxies.
Does this make sense? My understanding is BOSH is XMPP encapsulated within
HTTP.
Thanks,
Matt Brown
Hey Matt,
Hello all,
Is BOSH support on the roadmap?
No, not currently.
It doesn't appear that it is present on the website roadmap list.
This would be great.
Why?
Emil
--sent from my mobile
···
On Nov 11, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
On 11 Nov 2013 21:48, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Well ... what's the advantage to using a SOCKS proxy or simply running your
server on 443?
--sent from my mobile
···
On 11 Nov 2013 22:05, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
The main reason is so that packets can get through layer 7 inspection
proxies.Does this make sense? My understanding is BOSH is XMPP encapsulated
within HTTP.Thanks,
Matt Brown
On Nov 11, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
Hey Matt,
On 11 Nov 2013 21:48, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is BOSH support on the roadmap?No, not currently.
> It doesn't appear that it is present on the website roadmap list.
>
> This would be great.Why?
Emil
--sent from my mobile
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Yes. XMPP packets are not HTTP packets?
Well ... what's the advantage to using a SOCKS proxy or simply running your
server on 443?
--sent from my mobile
···
On Nov 11, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
On 11 Nov 2013 22:05, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
The main reason is so that packets can get through layer 7 inspection
proxies.Does this make sense? My understanding is BOSH is XMPP encapsulated
within HTTP.Thanks,
Matt Brown
On Nov 11, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
Hey Matt,
On 11 Nov 2013 21:48, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is BOSH support on the roadmap?No, not currently.
> It doesn't appear that it is present on the website roadmap list.
>
> This would be great.Why?
Emil
--sent from my mobile
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
And what is preventing your layer 7 inspector from scanning for
xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/httpbind' and blocking all those requests?
I do see a point though, as it is explained in XEP-0124 and XEP-0206 (but
not for firewall traversing):
"[...] useful in situations where a device or client is unable to maintain a
long-lived TCP connection to an XMPP server."
and
"[...] efficiently using multiple synchronous HTTP request/response pairs
without requiring the use of frequent polling or chunked responses."
Ingo
From: users-bounces@jitsi.org [mailto:users-bounces@jitsi.org] On Behalf
Of
Matt Brown
Sent: Montag, 11. November 2013 22:30
To: Jitsi Users
Subject: Re: [jitsi-users] Will BOSH be supported?
Yes. XMPP packets are not HTTP packets?Well ... what's the advantage to using a SOCKS proxy or simply
running
your server on 443?
--sent from my mobile
The main reason is so that packets can get through layer 7
inspection proxies.Does this make sense? My understanding is BOSH is XMPP
encapsulated within HTTP.Thanks,
Matt Brown
Hey Matt,
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is BOSH support on the roadmap?No, not currently.
> It doesn't appear that it is present on the
website
roadmap list.
>
> This would be great.Why?
Emil
--sent from my mobile
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org Unsubscribe
instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org Unsubscribe instructions and
other list options:
···
-----Original Message-----
On Nov 11, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
On 11 Nov 2013 22:05, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 11, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
On 11 Nov 2013 21:48, "Matt Brown" > <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Thanks for the info. Look forward to the possibility.
···
On Nov 11, 2013, at 4:51 PM, Ingo Bauersachs <ingo@jitsi.org> wrote:
And what is preventing your layer 7 inspector from scanning for
xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/httpbind' and blocking all those requests?I do see a point though, as it is explained in XEP-0124 and XEP-0206 (but
not for firewall traversing):
"[...] useful in situations where a device or client is unable to maintain a
long-lived TCP connection to an XMPP server."
and
"[...] efficiently using multiple synchronous HTTP request/response pairs
without requiring the use of frequent polling or chunked responses."Ingo
-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces@jitsi.org [mailto:users-bounces@jitsi.org] On BehalfOf
Matt Brown
Sent: Montag, 11. November 2013 22:30
To: Jitsi Users
Subject: Re: [jitsi-users] Will BOSH be supported?
Yes. XMPP packets are not HTTP packets?On Nov 11, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:
Well ... what's the advantage to using a SOCKS proxy or simply
running
your server on 443?
--sent from my mobile
On 11 Nov 2013 22:05, "Matt Brown" <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
The main reason is so that packets can get through layer 7
inspection proxies.Does this make sense? My understanding is BOSH is XMPP
encapsulated within HTTP.Thanks,
Matt Brown
On Nov 11, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> > wrote:
Hey Matt,
On 11 Nov 2013 21:48, "Matt Brown" >> <matthewbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is BOSH support on the roadmap?No, not currently.
> It doesn't appear that it is present on the
website
roadmap list.
>
> This would be great.Why?
Emil
--sent from my mobile
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org Unsubscribe
instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org Unsubscribe instructions and
other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@jitsi.org
Unsubscribe instructions and other list options:
http://lists.jitsi.org/mailman/listinfo/users