I'm getting a little clearer. Thanks Dustin and Stacy!
On a practical
level this boils down to a simple practical question: Do
I need to worry
about configuring HTTP and AMF ports when I have several
webApps on the same
server, like I must with RTMP?
I'm pretty sure that the answer is no, but
I'd love an authoritative
answer from Adobe. :-)
And while we're at
it, is there a range of port numbers that I should be
using for the RTMP
assignments? The "flex" template app is at 2038. The
"samples" app is at
2037. How high and low can I go? BTW, my TCP/IP
Network Administration book
(which I obviously haven't fully absorbed
:-) says that IANA keeps a list of
assigned & registered ports. When I
go to the page (http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers)
these two
ports are associated with other programs. Might it be a good idea
for
Adobe to find a short range of numbers that isn't already claimed, and
claim them? Not that I really know anything about this...
:-)
Douglas
Dustin Mercer wrote:
>
> The server port
in this context is actually the HTTP port of your
> server. The Flex Java
architecture picks this up from the web server
> and binds it to that
uri. The reason there is not a problem with that
> particular port is
because it's the standard HTTP port. All web apps
> can share that port
and it's not making any time of remembered
> connection with the flash
client. Only the RTMP channel does that.
>
> I don't know about this
part for sure, but I think the RTMP channel is
> something Adobe built
into the Flex framework that is like a mini
> server that enables the
"Real Time" portion of the Flex Data Services.
> Someone from Adobe can
correct me if I am wrong, that is only my
> assumption. Hope that
helps!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
> <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of
Douglas McCarroll
> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re:
[flexcoders] Questions about RTMP ports and channel
>
definitions
>
> Hi Stacy (and all),
>
> That makes
perfect sense. But am I correct in guessing that code like
>
this...
>
> uri="http://
>
{server.name}:{server.port}/{context.root}/messagebroker/amfpolling
>
>
...indicates that our webApp is using the same port for AMF as other
>
webApps? (I assume that "server.port" is defined somewhere in FDS
>
compiled code - I can't find it in any of the config files.)
>
>
...and if so, why isn't this a problem? Why would several instances be
>
able to listen to the same port for AMF and HTTP? Doesn't make sense.
>
Obviously, there's something here that I don't understand
here...
>
> Douglas
>
> Stacy Young wrote:
>
>
> > To answer # 1: trying to have two instances of FDS bind to the
same
> > port is the same as trying to run two web servers on the same
machine
> > and bind them both to port 80. It's not a matter of message
routing
> > ...the port is already in use so the second instance will
fail since it
> > can not bind to that same port number on
startup.
> >
> > -Stace
> >
> > ------------
----------------------------------------------
>
>
> > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
> <mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
>
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com
<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>]
> > *On Behalf
Of *Douglas McCarroll
> > *Sent:* Sunday, October 22, 2006 1:44
PM
> > *To:* flexcoders post
> > *Subject:* [flexcoders]
Questions about RTMP ports and channel
> definitions
> >
>
> Hi All,
> >
> > I recently wrote a post on my
blog
> > <http://www.brightworks.com/flex_ability/?p=17
> <http://www.brightworks.com/flex_ability/?p=17>
>
> <http://www.brightworks.com/flex_ability/?p=17
> <http://www.brightworks.com/flex_ability/?p=17>>>
about an error I was
> > encountering. A kind commenter explained that
my problem was caused by
> > the fact that I had two different webApps
running that were both
> > configured - in their
services-config.xml files - so that their RTMP
> > channels used
the same port.
> >
> > I want to revise my post to explain
this, but want to make sure that I
> > understand how things work
first.
> >
> > So I'd welcome any feedback on the following
explanations & questions:
> >
> > 1. Obviously it is bad
to have two different webApps use the same RTMP
> > port. I assume that
webApps can't share the same port because, well, how
> > would they
know which webApp a particular message is being sent to? I
> > suppose
that this could be resolved by giving different destination
> > names
to the different webApp's RTMP destinations, but I can imagine how
> >
this approach could create problems. Anyway, I'm wondering if anyone
>
> here can explain the crux of the problem more clearly or
succinctly...
> >
> > 2. I assume that configuring a
channel with a specific port number (e.g.
> >
uri="rtmp://{server.name}:2038") does two things:
> > a. It
tells the FDS server-side code to listen to that port for that
> >
channel.
> > b. It tells clients to connect to that port if they're
using that
> > channel. I assume that there's some mechanism whereby
clients say, "hey
> > webApp, what port do I use for this RTMP
channel?"
> >
> > Am I understanding correctly here?
>
>
> > 3. I'm guessing that sharing ports between webApps isn't a
problem for
> > HTTP and AMF channels. The reason I think this is that
they are
> > configured in channel definitions with URIs like
this:
> >
>
uri="http://{server.name}:{server.port}/{context.root}/messagebroker/amfpolling
>
>
> > ... as opposed to specifying a specific port, as we do in RTMP
channel
> > defs.
> >
> > Do I understand this
correctly?
> >
> > 4. I'm guessing that the reason why this
isn't a problem is that they
> > don't use a sustained connection, as
RTMP channels do. Is this correct?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
for any input! :-)
> >
> > Douglas McCarroll
>
>
> > *AVIS IMPORTANT*
> >
> >
>
>
> > *WARNING*
> >
> > Ce message électronique et
ses pièces jointes peuvent contenir des
> > renseignements
confidentiels, exclusifs ou légalement privilégiés
> > destinés au seul
usage du destinataire visé. L'expéditeur original ne
> > renonce à
aucun privilège ou à aucun autre droit si le présent message
> > a été
transmis involontairement ou s'il est retransmis sans son
> >
autorisation. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé du présent
> >
message ou si vous l'avez reçu par erreur, veuillez cesser
> >
immédiatement de le lire et le supprimer, ainsi que toutes ses pièces
>
> jointes, de votre système. La lecture, la distribution, la copie ou
>
> tout autre usage du présent message ou de ses pièces jointes par
des
> > personnes autres que le destinataire visé ne sont pas autorisés
et
> > pourraient être illégaux. Si vous avez reçu ce courrier
électronique
> > par erreur, veuillez en aviser l'expéditeur.
>
>
> >
> >
> > This electronic message and its
attachments may contain confidential,
> > proprietary or legally
privileged information, which is solely for the
> > use of the intended
recipient. No privilege or other rights are waived
> > by any
unintended transmission or unauthorized retransmission of this
> >
message. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if
>
> you have received it in error, you should immediately stop reading
>
> this message and delete it and all attachments from your system.
The
> > reading, distribution, copying or other use of this message or
its
> > attachments by unintended recipients is unauthorized and may
be
> > unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
notify the
> > sender.
> >
> >
>
>
--
> Flexcoders Mailing List
> FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>
>
Search Archives:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
> <http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
