[aerogear-dev] [SimplePush] Sockjs support

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Daniel Bevenius
<daniel.bevenius at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've been working on adding support for Sockjs to the SimplePush server.
> There is a project named socksj-netty [1] which is an external project
> written for Netty 3.x.
> We are using Netty 4 and there have been quite a few changes between these
> two versions. I've spent some time already trying to upgrade to Netty 4 but
> I have not been completely successful. Testing has been hard as there is
> only an external test suite [2], so it's been a matter of getting the code
> base to compile and trying to change as little as possible to work with
> Netty 4.
> Perhaps due to my lack of understanding the sockjs-protocol I've found
> this to be somewhat of guess work. There are also parts of the
> sockjs-protocol that I'm not sure are implemented, like heartbeats.
>
> I'm now considering rewriting the sockjs-netty and use the "Netty 4 way".
> This will take some time which was not planned for.
> Another option that Matthias brought up was to instead use Vert.x. It was
> discussed previously what we should base our implementation on and I got
> the impression that we "should" stick with Netty. I've been very happy with
> Netty and would like to continue with it, but this might be that I'm more
> familiar with it compared to Vert.x.
>


I'd not suggest to REWRITE the entire server in vert.x - that would be
wasting time.
I'd try to use Vert.x's SockJS capacity and internally use our SimplePush
Server "as a library" (e.g. like sebi did). Mainly because SockJS is
already implemented and working with vert.x

Right now the SimplePush Server accepts incoming WebSocket request:
* this could be "disabled"
* vert.x could be use to accept incoming SockJS connections. the connection
endpoint, would now talk to your CORE server ("as a library")



However, writing a Netty based Codec for SockJS, would fit the current
approach better (E.g. module up the server inside of the AS etc).
I agree that the rewrite is probably way better instead of fixing the
mentioned project.




>
> So I'd like to hear what people think:
> 1. Implement Netty Sockjs
> 2. Switch to Vert.x instead
>
> thanks,
>
> /Dan
>
> [1] https://github.com/cgbystrom/sockjs-netty
> [2] https://github.com/sockjs/sockjs-protocol
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130527/ccf26c0f/attachment-0001.html