Just FYI i've moved over the start of the Federation docs to here<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/Federation>. Will work on getting the rest of the Federation stuff over shortly, there's a couple of TODOs If anyone could help out with this stuff or offer suggestions that'd be great!
Thanks Angus Turner [email protected] On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Bruno Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Ali Lown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Good luck with this. It has been ~a year since I last did got it > > working happily (since nobody else had something, I just had a few > > virtual machines setup for it). > > > > > I'm attempting again to make my wave server federable, and have some > > > questions that I hope someone can answer: > > > 1) Is there any wave server out there that will accept self-signed > > > certificates? I'd like to test this first, before I try ca-issued > > > certificates (because I'm guessing it may be more difficult to achieve > > that > > > and I want to start simple, though I may be wrong). > > > > None currently. I can make one available if needed, but the effort to > > get a certificate from StartCom is significantly less than the effort > > to make it all work together anyway. > > Neither route is any more difficult. > > > > Understood, I'll go with signed certs then. Any existing wiab servers I > could use for federation tests, my server having a ca-issued cert? > > > > > 2) The check-certificates.sh script seems to be outdated, it assumes > > that > > > either run-config.sh or run-config.sh.example exist, but none of them > > exist > > > anymore (I'm in git master branch). Can I simpy comment out those > checks > > in > > > check-certificates.sh and go ahead, or is something important really > > > missing if I did that? > > > > The problem with removing the run-config.sh check is that the rest of > > the script depends on the values it got from that. (In short the > > script is pretty much useless now). > > > > Remove or fix? > > > > Would it be appropriate to include those checks at the start of the > "run-server" ant target? > They seem to automate part of the checks outlined here: > http://www.waveprotocol.org/federation/certificates > > > 3) The initial setup I'm aiming for is this: use my own desktop pc > > (running > > > debian sid), forward whatever ports are necessary in the router (so far > > > I've forwarded 9898 tcp incoming), and assume people can access my wiab > > > server through my dyndns subdomain (which is in the form " > > foobar.dyndns.org"). > > > Is this setup enough for testing federation, or would I need to > > > purchase/use a domain that *I* fully control (e.g. "foobar.com") in > > order > > > to configure it in ways that dyndns may not allow? > > > > To allow XMPP communication to work, you need to be able to setup TXT > > records detailing which port to use for the wave service. I don't know > > if dyndns allows you to do this. > > > > Just checked this, it looks like for free accounts you can barely do > anything. > > Fortunately I have some regular domains that I could use (e.g. stenyak.com > ). > By reading the docs, it looks like I could set a "wave" SRV record that > points to my dyndns subdomain (foobar.dyndns.org) on port 9898. That > dyndns > subdomain has the A record that actually points to my home network IP, > where the 9898 port is forwarded to the relevant computer in the lan. > > Is this plan correct? Would wave addresses then be [email protected], > [email protected], etc? > > If so, does all of this mean that I can only have one wave server on the > stenyak.com domain, or could I have several, for example a server on > wave1.stenyak.com and another one on wave2.stenyak.com? (I might try this > for testing federation in a controlled environment, before I try to > federate with 3rd party servers) > > > -- > Saludos, > Bruno González > > _______________________________________________ > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > http://www.stenyak.com >
