I'm currently hosting both my rails app and a faye-server app on Heroku. The faye server has been cloned from here (https://github.com/ntenisOT/Faye-Heroku-Cedar) and seems to be running correctly. I have disabled websockets, as they are not supported on Heroku. Despite the claim on Faye's site that:
"Faye clients and servers transparently support cross-domain communication, so your client can connect to a server on any domain you like without further configuration."
I am still running into this error when I try to post to a faye channel:
XMLHttpRequest cannot load http://MYFAYESERVER.herokuapp.com. Origin http://MYAPPURL.herokuapp.com is not allowed by Access-Control-Allow-Origin.
I have read about CORS and tried implementing some solutions outlined here: http://www.tsheffler.com/blog/?p=428 but have so far had no luck. I'd love to hear from someone who:
1) Has a rails app hosted on Heroku
2) Has a faye server hosted on Heroku
3) Has the two of them successfully communicating with each other!
Thanks so much.
I just got my faye and rails apps hosted on heroku communicating within the past hour or so... here are my observations:
Make sure your FAYE_TOKEN is set on all of your servers if you're using an env variable.
Disable websockets, which you've already done... client.disable(...) didn't work for me, I used Faye.Transport.WebSocket.isUsable = function(_,c) { c(false) } instead.
This may or may not apply to you, but was the hardest thing to track down for me... in my dev environment, the port my application is running on will be tacked onto the end of the specified hostname for my faye server... but this appeared to cause a failure to communicate in production. I worked around that by creating a broadcast_server_uri method in application_controller.rb that handles inclusion of a port when necessary, and then use that anywhere I spin up a new channel.
....
class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
def broadcast_server
if request.port.to_i != 80
"http://my-faye-server.herokuapp.com:80/faye"
else
"http://my-faye-server.herokuapp.com/faye"
end
end
helper_method :broadcast_server
def broadcast_message(channel, data)
message = { :ext => {:auth_token => FAYE_TOKEN}, :channel => channel, :data => data}
uri = URI.parse(broadcast_server)
Net::HTTP.post_form(uri, :message => message.to_json)
end
end
And in my app javascript, including
<script>
var broadcast_server = "<%= broadcast_server %>"
var faye;
$(function() {
faye = new Faye.Client(broadcast_server);
faye.setHeader('Access-Control-Allow-Origin', '*');
faye.connect();
Faye.Transport.WebSocket.isUsable = function(_,c) { c(false) }
// spin off your subscriptions here
});
</script>
FWIW, I wouldn't stress about setting Access-Control-Allow-Origin as it doesn't seem to be making a difference either way - I see XMLHttpRequest cannot load http://... regardless, but this should still works well enough to get you unblocked. (although I'd love to learn of a cleaner solution...)
Can't say I have used Rails/Faye on Heroku but have you tried setting the Access-Control-Allow-Origin header to something like Access-Control-Allow-Origin: your-domain.com?
For testing you could also do Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * to see if that helps
Custom headers
Some services require the use of additional HTTP headers to connect to
their Bayeux server. You can add these headers using the setHeader()
method, and they will be sent if the underlying transport supports
user-defined headers (currently long-polling only).
client.setHeader('Authorization', 'OAuth abcd-1234');
Source: http://faye.jcoglan.com/browser.html
So try client.setHeader('Access-Control-Allow-Origin', '*');
Related
We've setup Cloudfront in front of our application, but unfortunately it strips the Upgrade header required for ActionCable to run.
We'd like to have a different subdomain that points to the same servers, but bypasses Cloudfront (socket.site.com, for instance). We've done this and it's somewhat working, but it seems like a persistent connection can't be made. ActionCable continues to retry to make the connection every 10s and seems unable to hold the connection open:
Any advice related to Cloudfront or different domains for ActionCable is appreciated.
To all who follow, hopefully this helps.
As of the time of me writing this (Oct. 2018), it doesn't appear that you can use ActionCable behind Cloudfront at all. CF will discard the upgrade header which will prevent a secure socket connection from ever being made.
Our setup was CF -> Application Load Balancer (ALB) -> EC2. On the AWS side, we began by making a subdomain (socket.example.com) that pointed directly to the same ALB and bypassed CF entirely. Note that Classic Load Balancers absolutely will not work. You can only use ALBs.
This alone did not fix the issue. On your Rails config, you have to add the following lines to your production.rb:
config.action_cable.url = 'wss://socket.example.com:28080/cable'
config.action_cable.allowed_request_origins = ['https://example.com'] # Not the subdomain
You may also need to update your CSP to include wss://socket.example.com/cable for connect_src.
If at this point you're getting a message about failing to upgrade, you need to ensure that your NGINX config is correct. This answer may help.
You will also need to reflect this change in your cable.js. This following snippet works for me with local development as well as production, but you may need to alter it. I wrote it with pre-ES6 in mind because this file never hit Babel in our configuration.
(function() {
this.App || (this.App = {})
var wsUrl
if(location.host.indexOf('localhost') != -1) {
wsUrl = '/cable'
} else {
var host = location.host
var protocol = location.protocol
wsUrl = protocol + '//socket.' + host + '/cable'
}
App.cable = ActionCable.createConsumer(wsUrl)
}).call(this)
That may be all you need, depending on your authentication scheme. However, I was using cookies shared between the main application and ActionCable and this caused a difficult bug. The connection would appear to be made correctly, but it would actually fail and ActionCable would retry every 10s. The final step was to ensure the auth cookies being set would work across the socket subdomain. I updated my cookie as such:
cookies.signed[:cookie_name] = {
value: payload,
domain: ['.socket.example.com', '.example.com']
# Some people have to specify tld_length, but I was fine without it
}
I am working on a project whereby we have sites (developed with ruby on rails) hosted on an Ubuntu server using tomcat. We want these sites to make HTTP calls to a service developed using Nancy. We have this working locally whereby the service is hosted on a machine that we can call within our network. We cannot however get it working when live. Here is an example call:
def get_call(routePath)
started_at = Time.now
enc_url = URI.encode("#{settings.service_endpoint}#{routePath}")
uri = URI.parse(enc_url)
http = Net::HTTP.new(uri.host, uri.port)
req = Net::HTTP::Get.new(uri.request_uri)
resp = http.request(req)
logger.bench 'SERVICE - GET', started_at, routePath
return resp if response_ok?(resp)
end
When working locally the settings are as follows:
settings.service_endpoint = http://10.10.10.27:7820
routePath = /Customers
When we upload it to the server we use the following:
settings.service_endpoint = http://127.0.0.1:24099
routePath = /Customers
We currently get the following error:
SocketError at /register
initialize: name or service not know
with the following line being highlighted:
resp = http.request(req)
Are we completely wrong with the IP being called. Should it be 127.0.0.1, localhost. 10.10.10.27 or something entirely different? The strange thing is we can do a GET call via telnet in our Ubuntu server (telnet 127.0.0.1 24099) so that must mean the server can make the calls but the site hosted on the server cannot. Do we need to include a HTTP proxy (have read some reference to that but dont really know if its needed).
Apologies if its obvious but we have never tried anything like this before so its all very perplexing. Any further information required just let me know.
We changed the service_endpoint to localhost and it worked. Not sure if this is because it didnt like "http://" or some other reason. Any explanation as to why this is the case would be much appreciated, just so we know. Thanks!
This is more of a conceptual understanding gap rather than technical one. I am new to web socket\messaging api's.
I ran a chat application using faye ruby server and everything works fine between two browsers.I want to send a message from a stand alone ruby client to a browser client which is sending messages to same server. Is it possible to send a message from a client like the one below to a browser whose script is also given below ?
This is not related to the application I created, but I was trying to understand the use of WS client api. Or specifically put , can I send message from a server client to browser client ? I guess I am lacking the understanding of the word 'client' here.
I see the messages on the server console, but the browser doesn't get the message sent by the stand alone client.
Also I see this when i run the client :
Started GET "/faye/test123" for 127.0.0.1 at 2015-04-09 07:17:46 -0400
require 'faye'
require 'eventmachine'
EM.run {
ws = Faye::WebSocket::Client.new('ws://localhost:9292/faye/test123')
ws.onopen = lambda do |event|
p [:open, ws.headers]
ws.send('987654321')
end
ws.on :open do |event|
p [:open]
ws.send('123 123 123 123')
p [:sent]
end
}
Browser script :
window.client = new Faye.Client('http://localhost:9292/faye');
client.subscribe('/test123', function(payload){
if(payload.message)
{
console.log('I am in here 77777.......'+payload.message);
return $("#incomingText").append(payload.message);
}
}
Looking at your code I think it might be useful to highlight the difference between websockets and faye.
Faye is a framework that supports a number of transports, websockets being just one of them. It can also do long polling for example. One of the benefits of Faye is that it can select the right transport that both the client and server understand. It also implements a simple pub/sub protocol on top of that transport, giving you a nice API to build off of.
Doing a pure websocket implementation is totally doable, but if you're going to go with Faye it's probably a good idea to use Faye's publish/subscribe API and not muck with Faye's websockets directly.
To answer your specific question:
Is it possible to send a message from a client like the one below to a browser whose script is also given below ?
Yes, absolutely but I would suggest doing it with Faye::Client. Here's what your server side code might look like:
client = Faye::Client.new('http://localhost:9292/faye')
client.publish('/test123', 'message' => 'Hello world')
With much more info here:
http://faye.jcoglan.com/ruby/clients.html
I'm trying to upload to my server (on Heroku) a file stored in a password protected FTP.
The problem is that this FTP also dont contain my production IP address on his whitelist (and i cant add it..) so i should use a proxy to connect my rails app this FTP.
I tried this code :
proxy_uri = URI(ENV['QUOTAGUARDSTATIC_URL'] || 'http://login:password#myproxy.com:9293')
Net::HTTP::Proxy(proxy_uri.host, proxy_uri.port,"login","password").start('ftp://login:password#ftp.website.com') do |http|
http.get('/path/to/myfile.gz').body
end
But my http.get returns me lookup ftp: no such host.
I also got this code for FTP download, but i dont know how to make it works with a proxy :
ftp = Net::FTP.new('ftp.myftp.com', 'login', 'password')
ftp.chdir('path/to')
ftp.getbinaryfile('myfile.gz', 'public/myfile.gz', 1024)
ftp.close
Thanks in advance.
I realise that you asked this question over 6 months ago, but I recently had a similar issue and found that this (unanswered) question is the top Google result, so I thought I would share my findings.
mudasobwa's comment below your original post has a link to the net/ftp documentation which explains how to use a SOCKS proxy...
Although you don't mention a specific requirement for a HTTP proxy in your original post, it seems obvious to me that is what you were trying to use. As I'm sure you're aware, this makes the SOCKS documentation totally irrelevant.
The following code has been tested on ruby-1.8.7-p357 using an HTTP proxy that does not require authentication:
file = File.open('myfile.gz', 'w')
http = Net::HTTP.start('myproxy.com', '9293')
resp, data = http.get('ftp://login:password#ftp.website.com')
file.write(data) if resp.code == "200"
file.close unless file.nil?
Source
This should give you a good starting point to figure the rest out for yourself.
To get you going, I would guess that you could use user:pass#myproxy.com for basic auth, or perhaps sending a Proxy-Authorization header in your GET request.
so I'm using the Pusher Heroku Add-on for my application. The application has live notifications, so when a user receives a message he will see a pop up notification saying "new message". However, In production I am getting the below error:
Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at ws://ws.pusherapp.com/app/b1cc5d4f400faddcb40b?protocol=7&client=js&version=2.1.6&flash=false.
Reload the page to get source for: http://js.pusher.com/2.1/pusher.min.js
And here's the Pusher controller:
class PusherController < ApplicationController
protect_from_forgery :except => :auth # stop rails CSRF protection for this action
def auth
Pusher.app_id = ENV['PUSHER_APP_ID']
Pusher.key = ENV['PUSHER_KEY']
Pusher.secret = ENV['PUSHER_SECRET']
if current_user && params[:channel_name] == "private-user-#{current_user.id}"
response = Pusher[params[:channel_name]].authenticate(params[:socket_id])
render :json => response
else
render :text => "Not authorized", :status => '403'
end
end
end
And I'm using the figaro gem to push the keys to heroku.
What am I doing wrong?
Kind regards
JS
That looks like a problem with Javascript, rather than Rails
We've got pusher working very well with one of our production apps, and it works by firstly having the pusher gem installed, allowing you to call the pusher JS files from your layout:
#app/views/layouts/application.html.erb
<%= javascript_include_tag "http://js.pusher.com/2.1/pusher.min.js" %>
Rails
You may also wish to put the pusher initialization code into an initializer:
#config/initializers/pusher.rb
Pusher.url = ENV["PUSHER_URL"]
Pusher.app_id = ENV["PUSHER_APP_ID"]
Pusher.key = ENV["PUSHER_KEY"]
Pusher.secret = ENV["PUSHER_SECRET"]
This will ensure app-wide connectivity, rather than controller-specific (allowing for greater flexibility)
Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at ws://ws.pusherapp.com/app/b1cc5d4f400faddcb40b?protocol=7&client=js&version=2.1.6&flash=false.
Reload the page to get source for: http://js.pusher.com/2.1/pusher.min.js
This doesn't necessarily mean anything is wrong. it just means that an unsecured WebSocket connection couldn't be established. Pusher's fallback strategy should result in a successful connection being established via either HTTP fallback (HTTP or HTTPS) or via WSS (a secure WebSocket connection).
Failed connection attempts are logged as console errors. There's nothing that can be done about that.
To test this you can bind to connection events and ensure that you are indeed connecting. The pusher-js JavaScript logging will also help determine what's happening.
You can also try http://test.pusher.com/