Hi,
We are behind an iptables firewall so we simply opened a bunch of ports
in addition to the 443 port to make the vnc work. Yes this is "bad" but
we actually like it this way.
In the previous incarnation of our cloud based on ONE 1.0, we had a UI
where one port proxied all the vnc connections.
We got into major problems with users behind NAT bridges: we did not
find a way to set up a correct proxy since all connections came from the
NAT box.
We much prefer opening a bunch of ports in favor of having NAT break VNC
support.
If the opennebula VNC system would revert back to that kind of system,
please make sure it works through a NAT solution!
Wkr,
Jhon
On 06/01/2012 09:20 AM, Hector Sanjuan wrote:
No, nothing has been changed regarding this aspect in 3.2.1.
If it works for you that probably means that your Sunstone clients can
open a direct connection from their browser to
sunstone_host:vnc_proxy_port, where the normal sunstone_host:443 is the
only one being proxied through lighthttpd. I guess your proxy is running
on the same machine as sunstone and no firewalls are in place so vnc
connections can happen. Or maybe you have a different setup that I
havent thought of?
Hector
En Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:06:03 +0200, Jhon Masschelein
<jhon.masschel...@sara.nl> escribió:
Hi,
Has something changed in 3.4.1 that makes this no longer work?
We're running 3.2.1 behind a lighttpd ssl proxy and the noVNC consoles
work (almost) perfectly for us...
Wkr,
Jhon
On 05/31/2012 11:00 PM, Hector Sanjuan wrote:
Hello,
bad news: noVNC uses websockets to open a connection to a tcp port on
the sunstone frontend which your reverse proxy is probably not letting
through. Actually, this port depends on the VM ID that you are
connecting to (proxy_base_port + vm_id), so as things are now there is
no straightforward way that you can get Sunstone VNC working with a
reverse proxy solution unless you take care of proxying a wide range of
ports, or find a way to let the connections through directly to them.
good news: We realised of this limitation and this will be changed for
the next release as part of http://dev.opennebula.org/issues/1209. The
idea is that we run a single websockets proxy instance on a single fixed
port.
So im afraid you just need to wait some weeks,
Hector
En Thu, 31 May 2012 21:51:48 +0200, Alberto Zuin - Liste
<li...@albertozuin.eu> escribió:
Hello all,
I'm setting up a new cloud (little, but this time it's mine ;-) with
OpenNebula 3.4.1.
Sunstone works like a charm when connecting directly on port 9869, but
I want using Lighttpd for ssl proxy. In this situation there is a
problem using NoVNC web console: when I click on the icon, appear the
popup on the bottom but no console.
No error in lighttpd log and in sunstone log.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Alberto
--
Jhon Masschelein
Senior Systeemprogrammeur
SARA - HPCV
Science Park 140
1098 XG Amsterdam
T +31 (0)20 592 8099
F +31 (0)20 668 3167
M +31 (0)6 4748 9328
E jhon.masschel...@sara.nl
http://www.sara.nl
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opennebula.org
http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
