powered by Jive Software

Gatewaynaming and nameresolution


gateways are name by using the openfire hostname prefixed by the service name. Is ist necessary, that these names e.g. msn.jabber.example.com, resolve ?



It is not necessary that they resolve. =)

Lemme ask you something, is the fact that I’m showing those names now causing confusion? I’ve gotten a couple of questions like this since adding that feature. Should I not be displaying that at all?

Well, a bit of tcpdump has showen that only port 5222 communication is visible. But they look like hostnames, so this questions comes up. I think a note in the readme will do.

GATE-340 =)

While using you debug version of gateway.jar i found the following:

2007.09.07 11:55:37 OS - Trying to connect to msn.jabber.example.com:5269(DNS lookup: msn.jabber.example.com:5269)

2007.09.07 11:55:37 OS - Plain connection to msn.jabber.example.com:5269 successful

2007.09.07 11:55:37 Connect Socket[http://addr=/,port=2939,localport=5269|http://addr=/,port= 2939,localport=5269]

Looks like nameresolution is done … I’ve added zone and host do DNS as I’ve seen that nameresolution failed.

Typically when you see that in your logs it means that the gateway plugin isn’t completely loaded. (in other words, the openfire server sees msn.jabber.example.com, recognizes that it’s not internal, and tries to connect to it as an external server)