Re: [GnomeMeeting-list] Connection to servers

[Damien Sandras <dsandras seconix com>]

Le lun 08/12/2003 à 10:58, daniel huhardeaux a écrit :
> >
> >It is extremely unprobable that such a feature appears in the next
> >release except if someone external codes it or if I code faster than
> >what I think. The ideal would be to have a list of possible ILS servers
> >in the prefs, not in the addressbook as it would be more intuitive.
> >  
> >
> So my request isn't so stupid :-) I mention addressbook while when I'm 
> looking for someone, I right clic on loocking for and have what I want 
> (my ils servers are all created there). So it's easier than to go in 
> prefs and ask which server GM has to use. And imagine that one of your 

There are 2 different things here :
- the servers you want to browse for remote contacts : they are in the
addressbook
- the servers you want to register to : they are in the preferences

> contact is also connected to 2 or more ils server. In this case, if you 
> want to contact it, you have to check one by one on which he's 
> connected! But perhaps you mean to create a prefered list in prefs and

Seriously, do you know many people registering to several ILS servers at
the same time? I'm not sure how you proposed idea would solve the
problem you are describing by the way (ie having to double-click on each
of his callto addresses to see if he is registered or not)

> then this list is available in servers addressbook list and from there 
> we can connect. So in this case ok ;-) And for Gatekeeper, could it be 

If we allow registering to several ILS servers, those ILS servers will
automatically be added to the addressbook, that sounds logical.

We could also have something more complicated from a code point of view
:
- Right-clicking on a server in teh addressbook brings a "properties
popup".
- Enabling registering in that popup would add the server in the list in
the prefs. Disabling registering in that popup would remove the server
in the list in the prefs.

I think that is the ideal solution, but I don't plan to code such a
thing before 1.00 because time is lacking and I still have much to do
(and most people only register to one server at a time).

> also possible to list them there, also with connected endpoints listed?
> 

Unfortunately H.323 gatekeepers do not allow to list connected
endpoints. If it was permitted we would have replaced ILS servers by
gatekeepers a long time ago, because ILS is not that great.

> >  
> >
> >>Also, how is it possible that a client coming from internet is 
> >>connecting to an ils server with a private IP (eg 192.168.x.x). And
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >The client sends its IP address to the ILS server. Our ILS server is
> >fixing it if there is a problem. People behind a NAT gateway will have a
> >private IP and most software will send that IP to the ILS server because
> >there is not easy way for the client to determine the real IP address.
> >Notice that most people registering with a private IP also have a
> >misconfigured NAT gateway and are polluting the ILS with unreachable
> >entries.
> >  
> >
> This is what I'm loocking for: how you modify perl script to get correct 
> address from client if there is a problem. I modify netmeeting perl 
> script to masquerade IP address of intranet client with valid IP address 
> on which ils server is running. Thus people can then be reached from 
> outside. But I didn't find a solution for others :-(
> 

You would have to patch openldap to pass the IP in a variable to the
perl sript. However, if those people do not forward the appropriate
ports from the gateway to the internal host, it won't work.

If you have a personal ILS server for people you know, I would suggest
you to replace it by a gatekeeper able to proxy, that would be of far
better quality.

> >  
> >
> >> 
> >>last, where is it possible to find information about xdap used by 
> >>ils.seconix (if there is one).
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >There is none, but you can ask questions.
> >  
> >
> Related to point 2: how to discover bad client IP address and how to 
> solve problem. Second, what is better with xdap? Is it still using perl 
> script? the same?
-- 
 _      Damien Sandras
(o-     
//\     It-Optics s.a.
v_/_    GnomeMeeting: http://www.gnomemeeting.org/
        FOSDEM 2004:  http://www.fosdem.org
        H.323 phone:  callto:ils.seconix.com/dsandras seconix com