Whenever you get a chance to do that I'll be happy to retest :) Thanks again
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > Yes, packet #46 because I try to make you connect over 9898. > (This is because I have the configuration mis-setup, but didn't want > to reboot the wave server to fix it). > > I can move it so that websockets goes over 443, then I will let you > try again. (At which time it should work fine). > > On 24 September 2012 17:09, Ben Hegarty <heg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5FF_Ld8SzsNMnlmZkZWZWtEQ28 > > > > Looks like you're right there Ali I'm seeing port not allowed in the http > > packets > > Cheers > > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > > > >> Yes. > >> > >> On 24 September 2012 17:01, Ben Hegarty <heg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Sure I can try there too, is it still set with the same dets? > >> > Regards > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Extracting the data as raw bytes from the first Websocket response > >> >> packet (#95) gives us the following HTML page (attached). > >> >> > >> >> So, it is _definitely_ an issue with your proxy server not > >> >> understanding the Websockets. > >> >> > >> >> For more information on exactly how they work, a good article would > >> >> be: http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2012/9/24/websockets-101/ > >> >> "The protocol went through many iterations and basically had to be > >> >> changed multiple times because of unforeseen security problems that > >> >> came up with misbehaving proxies." seems to sum-up the problem. > >> >> > >> >> Ali > >> >> > >> >> NB: When you tried on my server (https://wave.eezysys.co.uk), I am > >> >> less certain as to why it failed there given all the traffic is > >> >> encrypted. (Unless your company proxy is terminating my SSL > >> >> connection, performing DPI on the now-decrypted data, and then > >> >> re-encrypting it before presenting it to you) > >> >> Could you do a wireshark capture for that server as well? > >> >> Actually, it might be because my server still tries to use a > >> >> non-standard port for the websockets, and it is quite likely you have > >> >> most outgoing ports blocked. > >> >> > >> >> On 24 September 2012 16:42, Ben Hegarty <heg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > Hey Ali, > >> >> > Basically I get 'A turbulance' after logging in and never go online > >> and > >> >> no > >> >> > wave data is saved down, you just see 'Unsaved all the time'.. > >> >> > I've uploaded the wireshark trace to the following location :) > >> >> > > >> >> > https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5FF_Ld8SzsNMm5oOGJXajlOV00 > >> >> > > >> >> > HTH > >> >> > > >> >> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> > basically it looks like the problem comes from the fact that the > >> >> request > >> >> >> > uses a relative path instead of a full path for the request > >> >> >> > >> >> >> AFAIK it is the browser's responsibility to convert relative paths > >> for > >> >> >> communicating to the server. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I've been investigating some issues that I've been having with > >> using > >> >> wave > >> >> >> > behind a proxy server > >> >> >> > >> >> >> What are the actual problems you are having? Unable to get > 'Online' > >> >> >> because the websocket doesn't get established? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > and found this thread about proxy issues which are > >> >> >> > identical to the issue I'm seeing... > >> >> >> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=107696 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> This seems to be about eclipse's internal proxy settings handling > >> >> >> being incorrect when it parses the relative URL. Assuming your > >> browser > >> >> >> is setup correctly the problem shouldn't lie with that. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > This GET here looks to be the source of the problem, I'm no > network > >> >> guy > >> >> >> so > >> >> >> > it would be nice to have this confirmed by someone else, but do > you > >> >> think > >> >> >> > this would be a difficult fix? I have my own env for testing > this > >> so I > >> >> >> > could easily apply a patch and retest just need some help with > the > >> >> >> > patch.. *(fingers > >> >> >> > crossed this is the issue)* > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The normal problem with websockets failing that I have seen, is > when > >> >> >> the proxy server doesn't understand (so drops) the UPGRADE > request. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Alternatively, it may well be the relative path, in which case the > >> >> >> problem lies with your proxy server being incorrectly configured > to > >> >> >> handle them (since relative paths are most definitely part of > >> >> >> RFC2616). > >> >> >> > >> >> >> What is the proxy server in question? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> It may be worth using wireshark to watch the actual request across > >> the > >> >> >> wire. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Ali > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Mobile Phone: +447767-322-122 > >> >> > Work Phone: +4420 79485612 > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Mobile Phone: +447767-322-122 > >> > Work Phone: +4420 79485612 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Mobile Phone: +447767-322-122 > > Work Phone: +4420 79485612 > -- Mobile Phone: +447767-322-122 Work Phone: +4420 79485612
