*I have added additional method*
What is this additional method or mechanism ?

*What I need is: room enter by given SID* simply by SID will not work.
Cause the URL contains the $roomId. Otherwise the SWF has to get the ROOMId
by doing a RTMP call. But that would mean it has to connect to the default
RTMP connection first.
So this is not possible. Simply use the scopeRoomId parameter.

Sebastian


2013/6/10 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]>

> - room enter: Most probably you are right :( I'm not really good in all
> those "room enter" methods so I have added additional method
> I would really appreciate the help in this.
> What I need is: room enter by given SID and room id with exit button
> visible :) (so the user entered is treated as "normal" OM user, not
> external)
>
> - room close: I have added JS call handling removing of room from the DOM
> or just replacing the DOM "the room" element with room list element.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:37 PM, [email protected] <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Quote:
>> *Additionally things are simplier in 3.0:
>> - Room enter connects to rtmp://xyz/openmeetings/$roomId (use case 1)*
>>
>> => This is not true. There is such a mechanism, however currently 3.0
>> does not use it. So it will first connect to the scope "hibernate" and then
>> to the scope "$roomId".
>> However it could be reworked to work like you describe. There is a param
>> "scopeRoomId", if that is specified it will directly connect to the scope
>> of the room instead of going to hibernate. However there is end the end
>> always a check:
>> It will request the conference session object from the user and compare
>> the roomId with the scopeRoomId, if that test is OK it will directly
>> connect to the $roomId, if that test fails, it will connect to the scope
>> hibernate and use the "normal" mechanism to get the $roomId and build an
>> URL with it. This check is mainly for security reasons, so that by just
>> manipulating the URL, the user can gain access to random rooms.
>>
>> *- Room leave just removes div with embedded flash from the DOM and
>> displays
>> main interface (use case 2)*
>> => Again, it could be done like that but I am not sure if it currenlty
>> really does.
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/6/10 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]>
>>
>>> +1 for displaying "Connection has been lost"
>>>
>>> Additionally things are simplier in 3.0:
>>> - Room enter connects to rtmp://xyz/openmeetings/$roomId (use case 1)
>>> - Room leave just removes div with embedded flash from the DOM and
>>> displays
>>> main interface (use case 2)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:55 AM, [email protected] <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Artyom,
>>> >
>>> > Quote: *When a user looses his connection he
>>> > get 3 attempts to reconnect. *
>>> > => Which is a funny co-incident. It should not do that, the 3 times
>>> try are
>>> > only for when you do your initial set up. It does try 3 times rtmp and
>>> then
>>> > switches to rtmpt.
>>> >
>>> > *If we don't, I offer to show user an error message without
>>> reconnection
>>> > attempts because unexpected leaving the room looks as a bug.*
>>> > =>I agree. It should not even try a single time. There should be just
>>> an
>>> > error message "Your lost the connection, please reload the
>>> application".
>>> > That would be the correct behaviour. Everything else is just confusing,
>>> > cause at the moment it looks like it does some "auto-reconnect". But
>>> there
>>> > is no such feature.
>>> > The only thing to make sure is that room-leave and room(-re)-entering
>>> still
>>> > works correctly:
>>> >  - Room enter disconnects from rtmp://xyz/openmeetings/hibernate to
>>> > rtmp://xyz/openmeetings/$roomId (use case 1)
>>> >  - Room leave disconnects from rtmp://xyz/openmeetings/$roomId to
>>> > rtmp://xyz/openmeetings/hibernate (use case 2)
>>> >  - If a user has rtmpt (you can test that by chaning the rtmp port to
>>> some
>>> > rubbish in the config.xml and clear your cache), then room enter and
>>> leaver
>>> > should still work the same _but_ using rtmpt instead of rtmp all the
>>> time.
>>> > (use case 3 [rtmpt-enter] and 4 [rtmpt-leave])
>>> >
>>> > You can verify if everything works correctly if you goto
>>> Administration >
>>> > Connections. If the re-connect on rooms leave is correct, then exiting
>>> and
>>> > re-entering a room with a user in another session will just increment
>>> the
>>> > ID of the roomClient by :
>>> > Exiting the room +1,
>>> > Renering the room +2 (one time SWF8 rtmp connection +1, one time SWF11
>>> > rtmp-connection +1)
>>> > If you just close your browser it does not increment the id by +1, just
>>> > closing your browser will just disconnect and send appropriate
>>> messages to
>>> > everybody.
>>> >
>>> > Administration > Connections is quite handy for development purpsose.
>>> On
>>> > click of an entry you can see every session attribute in the
>>> RoomClient.
>>> > You currently always see 2 entries per user as soon as he is in the
>>> > conference room. Every user has two separated rtmp connections, one
>>> for the
>>> > SWF8 legacy code and one for the "new" SWF11 container. SWF11 does
>>> handle
>>> > all the Audio/Video stuff. SWF11 does only connect when you really need
>>> > Audio/Video. So only in the conference room and maybe in the recording
>>> > section.
>>> >
>>> > Maybe part of this information is redundant for you Artyom, however if
>>> you
>>> > have any further questions please let me know.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Sebastian
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2013/6/7 Artyom Horuzhenko <[email protected]>
>>> >
>>> > > Sebastian, let me explain our trouble. When a user looses his
>>> connection
>>> > he
>>> > > get 3 attempts to reconnect. If all of the attempts are failed, the
>>> user
>>> > > sees an error message, otherwise - the user reconnects to dashboard.
>>> We
>>> > are
>>> > > discussing idea about reconnecting to room again instead of
>>> dashboard. I
>>> > > agree with you that whiteboard, userlist etc should be reloaded, but
>>> I
>>> > want
>>> > > to know if we really need restoring connection. If we don't, I offer
>>> to
>>> > > show user an error message without reconnection attempts because
>>> > unexpected
>>> > > leaving the room looks as a bug.
>>> > > 07.06.2013 13:28 пользователь "[email protected]" <
>>> > > [email protected]>
>>> > > написал:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Sorry I get lost in that kind of discussion.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Artyom started a vote, quote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > *I think in this case the functionality like this is useless,
>>> > > > it should be removed at all or improved to allow users reconnect
>>> > without
>>> > > > leaving the room. I offer to vote about this thing:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > +1 fix leaving rooms
>>> > > >  0 don't change anything
>>> > > > -1 remove reconnection functionality at all*
>>> > > >
>>> > > > So what does +1 mean *fix leaving the room* ... what has that to do
>>> > with
>>> > > > what you say Alexei ?!
>>> > > > In fact I don't think that there is anything to fix with that
>>> > reconnect.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > And whatever Artyom proposed has nothing todo with fixing an user
>>> that
>>> > > lost
>>> > > > the connection.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > About the *reconnect when user lost connection* feature:
>>> > > > I think in another thread I tried to explain: When the connection
>>> is
>>> > > lost,
>>> > > > simply reconnecting the rtmp-connection has _no_ meaning, as you
>>> don't
>>> > > know
>>> > > > how long the user was away. You need to re-sync the whiteboard, the
>>> > > videos
>>> > > > list, the list of participants and the list of current
>>> screensharing
>>> > > > sessions. So in fact you can simply clean everything and re-login
>>> the
>>> > > user.
>>> > > > The same the other way round, everybody that was in the room, will
>>> have
>>> > > to
>>> > > > re-initialize the user that was lost. Simply connecting the
>>> > > rtmp-connection
>>> > > > will just make the situation worse as it may look like *working*
>>> but in
>>> > > > fact nothing really *works*.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > So I am sorry but from my point of view you mix things together
>>> that
>>> > have
>>> > > > nothing todo with each other:
>>> > > > Reconnecting while leaving the room VS connection lost.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Sebastian
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 2013/6/7 Alexei Fedotov <[email protected]>
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > I used the following arguments:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > 1. Skype tries to re-connect when  the connection is lost
>>> (though it
>>> > > > > works awfully). Why should not we?
>>> > > > > 2. When one re-connects (doesn't matter how, maybe after the
>>> flash
>>> > > > > crash), she should reappear in the place where she was before the
>>> > > > > break. This simplifies reestablishing connection. I think this is
>>> > > > > useful behavior.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Combining two of these arguments we get "room reconnect" feature
>>> > which
>>> > > > > can potentially improve the user experience.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > This is close to the second variant, which is called the cluster
>>> > > > > re-connect.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
>>> > > > > Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
>>> > > > > http://dataved.ru/
>>> > > > > +7 916 562 8095
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:47 PM, [email protected]
>>> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > > Hallo Artyom,
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > *We know that reconnection works somehow*
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Just to be _very_ clear. There is no such feature!
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > There is a co-incident that may _look like_ a reconnect.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > The *feature* is that the flash clients does try to connect 3
>>> times
>>> > > to
>>> > > > > the
>>> > > > > > rtmpconnection.
>>> > > > > > This initial connection try out is _never_ cleared. So if your
>>> > > > > connections
>>> > > > > > gets lost (and you did not have initially the bad luck of using
>>> > your
>>> > > 3
>>> > > > > > tries), the rtmp connection does reconnect.
>>> > > > > > However this is just a funny co-incident. This was never the
>>> intend
>>> > > to
>>> > > > > > re-connect the rtmp connection when it gets lost while the
>>> user is
>>> > > > > already
>>> > > > > > in the meeting.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > So what other types of *reconnect* are you refering to?
>>> > > > > > There is one reconnect when the user leaves the room, that is
>>> when
>>> > he
>>> > > > > > switches the rtmp connection URL from:
>>> > > > > > rtmp://host:port/openmeetings/$roomId
>>> > > > > > to
>>> > > > > > rtmp://host:port/openmeetings/hibernate (default channel)
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > The same *re-connect* happens when he enters the room. He has
>>> to
>>> > > switch
>>> > > > > > from the default/global scope to the room scope.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > There is no option to remove this functionality, if the user
>>> does
>>> > not
>>> > > > > > change the rtmp-connection he can never receive any messages
>>> and
>>> > > connect
>>> > > > > to
>>> > > > > > the streams of the conference room.
>>> > > > > > This is the concept of streaming servers:
>>> > > > > > If you want to connect to a particular room and receive update
>>> > > > > > notifications of events of that room => Connect/Subscribe to
>>> that
>>> > > URL!
>>> > > > > > Connecting/Subscribing to that URL cannot happen without a
>>> > reconnect
>>> > > when
>>> > > > > > you enter or leave the room.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Btw: THis functionality is actually the basis for any kind of
>>> > > clustering
>>> > > > > as
>>> > > > > > the point where somebody enters and leaves the room is when it
>>> gets
>>> > > > > > re-directed to another server. So without that reconnect,
>>> there is
>>> > no
>>> > > > > > clustering.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > So those are the different version of "reconnect" that
>>> currently
>>> > > exist.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Can you please clarify what exactly you meant with
>>> *reconnecting*?
>>> > > What
>>> > > > > > kind of reconnecting?
>>> > > > > > And did you see the impact of your proposal?
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > > > Sebastian
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > 2013/6/7 Artyom Horuzhenko <[email protected]>
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >> Hello collegues,
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >> I want to discuss reconnection again and decide what should
>>> we do
>>> > > with
>>> > > > > it.
>>> > > > > >> We know that reconnection works somehow: users leave the room
>>> > after
>>> > > > > >> reconnection. I think in this case the functionality like
>>> this is
>>> > > > > useless,
>>> > > > > >> it should be removed at all or improved to allow users
>>> reconnect
>>> > > without
>>> > > > > >> leaving the room. I offer to vote about this thing:
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >> +1 fix leaving rooms
>>> > > > > >>  0 don't change anything
>>> > > > > >> -1 remove reconnection functionality at all
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >> I made some experiments and suppose that reconnection can be
>>> fixed
>>> > > > > without
>>> > > > > >> global changes in code, but requires deep testing. Anyway, my
>>> vote
>>> > > is
>>> > > > > +1.
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > Sebastian Wagner
>>> > > > > > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> > > > > > http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> > > > > > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> > > > > > [email protected]
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > > Sebastian Wagner
>>> > > > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> > > > http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> > > > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> > > > [email protected]
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Sebastian Wagner
>>> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> > http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> > [email protected]
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> WBR
>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> [email protected]
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>



-- 
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
[email protected]

Reply via email to