|
Home > Archive > Macromedia Flash Server > August 2005 > "Trying More than One Port at Once"
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
"Trying More than One Port at Once"
|
|
| Brandon_Krakowsky-t6Q6IArRIhmxKhIkFyZ7poFTLv+w 2005-08-12, 8:45 pm |
| What does everyone think of this?
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx...ls_proxy03.html
Scroll down to "Trying More than One Port at Once".
I'm sure you're all aware of the technique. Just wondering if anybody has
any real experience using it. We have 1 client who can ONLY connect via
tunneling, when they're behind their firewall. It's been taking them so
long to connect this way (via the default method of letting the Flash
Player cycle through RTMP, then RTMPT), I just changed the protocol to
RTMPT to speed things up. But I'd like users who CAN connect via RTMP to
have that option.
The method in this article looks interesting.
Thanks,
Brandon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Graeme Bull 2005-08-12, 8:45 pm |
| it will crash some computers browser or just lock it up.
I can't narrow it down, but it's happened more than once. Although I agree
trying more than one at once is much faster and for the most part works
fine.
Graeme
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of
Brandon_Krakowsky-t6Q6IArRIhmxKhIkFyZ7poFTLv+wk40W@public.gmane.org
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 8:06 AM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Cc: 'FlashComm Mailing List'; flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
Subject: [FlashComm] "Trying More than One Port at Once"
What does everyone think of this?
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx...ls_proxy03.html
Scroll down to "Trying More than One Port at Once".
I'm sure you're all aware of the technique. Just wondering if anybody has
any real experience using it. We have 1 client who can ONLY connect via
tunneling, when they're behind their firewall. It's been taking them so
long to connect this way (via the default method of letting the Flash Player
cycle through RTMP, then RTMPT), I just changed the protocol to RTMPT to
speed things up. But I'd like users who CAN connect via RTMP to have that
option.
The method in this article looks interesting.
Thanks,
Brandon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Will Law 2005-08-13, 8:45 pm |
| Hi Brandon
I wrote a dev center article on port/firewall negotiation by Flash clients
that you may find useful:
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/fl..._streaming.html
The technique works. It's the same one that is deployed inside the
VitalStream mediaOps components, which are powering a lot of the big sites
today. One important note is don't call your alternate connections
simultaneously - space them out by a second or more. Attempting more than 3
nc.connect within milliseconds of each other has been shown to lead to comm
problems between the flash client and the browser.
Cheers
Will
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of
Brandon_Krakowsky-t6Q6IArRIhmxKhIkFyZ7poFTLv+wk40W@public.gmane.org
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 4:06 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Cc: 'FlashComm Mailing List'; flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
Subject: [FlashComm] "Trying More than One Port at Once"
What does everyone think of this?
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx...ls_proxy03.html
Scroll down to "Trying More than One Port at Once".
I'm sure you're all aware of the technique. Just wondering if anybody has
any real experience using it. We have 1 client who can ONLY connect via
tunneling, when they're behind their firewall. It's been taking them so
long to connect this way (via the default method of letting the Flash Player
cycle through RTMP, then RTMPT), I just changed the protocol to RTMPT to
speed things up. But I'd like users who CAN connect via RTMP to have that
option.
The method in this article looks interesting.
Thanks,
Brandon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| erixtekila 2005-08-14, 5:45 pm |
| > I wrote a dev center article on port/firewall negotiation by Flash =20
> clients
> that you may find useful:
>
> http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/flashcom/articles/=20
> firewall_streaming.html
>
> The technique works. It's the same one that is deployed inside the
> VitalStream mediaOps components, which are powering a lot of the big =20=
> sites
> today. One important note is don't call your alternate connections
> simultaneously - space them out by a second or more. Attempting more =20=
> than 3
> nc.connect within milliseconds of each other has been shown to lead to =
=20
> comm
> problems between the flash client and the browser.
Hi,
I've used a similar technique on a recent project and it's really the =20=
best conditions ever to manage a stream.
The answer for a closed port is quiet fast.
So making a step by step connection try is quiet fast also.
That way you could manage more precisely the protocols and ports.
You can even bypass ports that you know you'll never use.
For example, i've made a useSSL(ok:Boolean) method that swicth to =20
another port sequence, if 443 won't ever been in use.
In another view, the bandwidth check that is provided in this example, =20=
if not so much accurate all times, is quiet fast.
It's a good compromise to begin playing a stream.
To finish, if your wish is to extend the user experience, you could =20
also save in a SharedObject the protocol/port that one user use to use =20=
(sorry for the repetition !)
That way, you'll be able to manage more precisely the connection =20
sequence for another attempt.
So yes, this technique is IMHO the best we could get nowadays with FCS =20=
API.
(Hope more in the future BTW=85)
Cheers
-----------
erixtekila
http://blog.v-i-a.net/=
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Brandon_Krakowsky-t6Q6IArRIhmxKhIkFyZ7poFTLv+w 2005-08-16, 5:45 pm |
| Thanks man. Exactly what I need. No even so much to stream, just to make
the right connection.
Thanks again,
Brandon
"Will Law" <wlaw-bWNh4K7BVeRWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Sent by: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
08/13/2005 07:55 PM
Please respond to
FlashComm Mailing List <flashcomm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org>
To
"'FlashComm Mailing List'" <flashcomm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org>
cc
Subject
RE: [FlashComm] "Trying More than One Port at Once"
Hi Brandon
I wrote a dev center article on port/firewall negotiation by Flash clients
that you may find useful:
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/fl..._streaming.html
The technique works. It's the same one that is deployed inside the
VitalStream mediaOps components, which are powering a lot of the big sites
today. One important note is don't call your alternate connections
simultaneously - space them out by a second or more. Attempting more than
3
nc.connect within milliseconds of each other has been shown to lead to
comm
problems between the flash client and the browser.
Cheers
Will
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of
Brandon_Krakowsky-t6Q6IArRIhmxKhIkFyZ7poFTLv+wk40W@public.gmane.org
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 4:06 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Cc: 'FlashComm Mailing List'; flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
Subject: [FlashComm] "Trying More than One Port at Once"
What does everyone think of this?
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx...ls_proxy03.html
Scroll down to "Trying More than One Port at Once".
I'm sure you're all aware of the technique. Just wondering if anybody has
any real experience using it. We have 1 client who can ONLY connect via
tunneling, when they're behind their firewall. It's been taking them so
long to connect this way (via the default method of letting the Flash
Player
cycle through RTMP, then RTMPT), I just changed the protocol to RTMPT to
speed things up. But I'd like users who CAN connect via RTMP to have that
option.
The method in this article looks interesting.
Thanks,
Brandon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
|
|
|
|
|