We did solve to redirect rtmp traffic by using different path segments, mod_proxy rule was path based.
In the config.xml you can specify different paths for HTTP and RTMP URLs (RTMPT will be handled with same path segments as RTMP) the config values are: RTMP Path segment: <webAppRootKey>openmeetings</webAppRootKey> HTTP Path segment <httpRootKey>/openmeetings/</httpRootKey> => RTMP URL will be: rtmp://localhost:$rtmpport/$webAppRootKey/ => RTMPT URL will be: rtmpt://localhost:$rtmpTunnelport/$webAppRootKey/ => HTTP Download/Upload URL will be: $protocol://localhost:$red5httpport$httpRootKey [missing / is no typo, the slash is in the httpRootKey so that you can make openmeetings directly run in WEB-ROOT with the path <httpRootKey>/</httpRootKey> ] Now you can modify config.xml to: <webAppRootKey>openmeetings_rtmp</webAppRootKey> And add a mod_proxy rule: traffic to openmeetings_rtmp port 80 redirect to localhost:1935 OR the same for RTMPT The issue is just you can configure rtmp AND rtmpt to have DIFFERENT a path segmements. Cause that would enable you to have mod_proxy settings for both. But I did always then just configure RTMPT to port 443. And that way I have HTTP => Port 80 RTMP => Port 80 RTMPT => Port 443 Of course you can also add one more mod_proxy rule: Redirect: $httpRootKey to localhost:5080, that way you can run yoru website AND OpenMeetings on port 80. Sebastian 2012/4/28 Alexei Fedotov <[email protected]> > 3) ... > any TCP/IP connection does not operate with paths > from the other side there may be several client connections connected > to the same server and port > > > On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Alexei Fedotov > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > http://helpx.adobe.com/flash-media-server/kb/ports-firewalls-flash-media-server.html > > shows how to initiate rtmp over different port > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Alexei Fedotov > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 1) it is impossible to redirect RTMP traffic > >>>> no quick answer > >> > >> 2) RTMPT contain all HTTP headers/cookies etc. == overhead > >>>> overhead is even bigger because it uses 6 bit from every 8 of binary > traffic > >> > >> 3) even if you think you perform > rtmpt://server:port/openmeetings/hibernate > >> all packets are sent to rtmpt://server:port/ (this is why it is > impossible > >> to proxy just RTMPT context) > >>>> no quick answer > >> > >> > >> > >> problems while implementing OOCP > >> 1) it will be impossible to use RTMP with it (please see 1) above) > >>>> noone asks for it > >> > >> 2) it will be additional traffic (please see 2)) > >>>> you use OOCP is fallback when 1935 is not available > >> > >> 3) it will be impossible to use current scheme (tomcat + apache + > >> mod_proxy) (please see 3)) NOTE mod_rewrite is able to help here, but it > >> also have own limitations. > >>>> what breaks current scheme? > >> > >> I'm not sure if I be able to create transparent proxy inside tomcat, but > >> I'll try. > >>>> there are few proxy solutions for Tomcat already > >> > >> -- > >> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > >> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > >> http://dataved.ru/ > >> +7 916 562 8095 > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> statements > >>> 1) it is impossible to redirect RTMP traffic > >>> 2) RTMPT contain all HTTP headers/cookies etc. == overhead > >>> 3) even if you think you perform > rtmpt://server:port/openmeetings/hibernate > >>> all packets are sent to rtmpt://server:port/ (this is why it is > impossible > >>> to proxy just RTMPT context) > >>> > >>> problems while implementing OOCP > >>> 1) it will be impossible to use RTMP with it (please see 1) above) > >>> 2) it will be additional traffic (please see 2)) > >>> 3) it will be impossible to use current scheme (tomcat + apache + > >>> mod_proxy) (please see 3)) NOTE mod_rewrite is able to help here, but > it > >>> also have own limitations. > >>> > >>> I'm not sure if I be able to create transparent proxy inside tomcat, > but > >>> I'll try. > >>> > >>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 17:14, Alexei Fedotov < > [email protected]>wrote: > >>> > >>>> I don't think multiple ports are problem - Timur's proof of concept > >>>> shows they are not. > >>>> > >>>> The main problem is the following: something is already running on 80 > >>>> port. So exact requirement for the solution follows: > >>>> > >>>> 1. The only openmeetings communication port (OOCP) should be a part of > >>>> the configuration. By default it would be port 80, and for those who > >>>> have somethings installed, they can move the port somewhere. > >>>> > >>>> 2. One should switch http or https for traffic over OOCP. > >>>> > >>>> 3. For OOCP over http I suggest using 1935 for RTMP, or falling back > >>>> to rtmpt over OOCP. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > >>>> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > >>>> http://dataved.ru/ > >>>> +7 916 562 8095 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 12:50 PM, [email protected] > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > Is this a question or a statement? > >>>> > > >>>> > You cannot run all services: http, https, rtmp, rtmpt, rtmps on the > >>>> > same port 80 and 443, you can only achieve that by cheating with > >>>> > subdomains + redirect/mod_proxy rules in Apache HTTPD. > >>>> > > >>>> > Our configuration currently allows people to configure http + rtmp > or > >>>> > http + rtmpt on the same port. > >>>> > However to practically achieve that you need Apache Webserver and > >>>> > configured with mod_proxy. > >>>> > > >>>> > Sebastian > >>>> > > >>>> > 2012/4/28 Alexei Fedotov <[email protected]>: > >>>> >> We have really long discussion on the subject: why does our typical > >>>> >> installation has two http servers - one is Apache jetty embedded > into > >>>> red5, > >>>> >> and another is Apache Httpd which redirects traffic from port 80 to > >>>> >> different ports of our product. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I faced strong resistance convincing people that decreasing number > of > >>>> >> servers and ports is good. Of course the less servers we have, less > >>>> >> installation work we have - why should we discuss it? > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Finally I noticed why two servers may be good for some people. This > >>>> applies > >>>> >> to the case when they want other http services like CMS or > E-learning to > >>>> >> run on the same machine. I was thinking mostly about our > Openmeetings > >>>> >> server farm, where are no advantages of keeping proxies, while each > >>>> httpd > >>>> >> costs 200 Mb per server. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> So the question is if we should keep using different ports in > >>>> openmeetings. > >>>> >> Are there any other reasons I missed? > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Concerning Maxim advice of using VPN - in my corporate life I > don't even > >>>> >> have an admin password or a right to run non-microsoft executables. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Thanks. > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > -- > >>>> > Sebastian Wagner > >>>> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > >>>> > http://www.openmeetings.de > >>>> > 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.openmeetings.de http://www.webbase-design.de http://www.wagner-sebastian.com [email protected]
