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:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> *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>> 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
Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to