Differential D11293

Add documentation for routing WebSockets through a reverse proxy
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by joshuaspence on Jan 9 2015, 12:24 AM.

Details

Reviewers

epriestley

Group Reviewers

Blessed Reviewers

Commits

Restricted Diffusion Commit
rP44f2195eec21: Add documentation for routing WebSockets through a reverse proxy

Summary

This is a little rough and should be considered an "advanced" option. Having said that, this works well in my install and I imagine that other installs will find this beneficial.

Test Plan

Eyeball it.

Diff Detail

Repository

rP Phabricator

Lint

Lint Not Applicable

Unit

Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

joshuaspence updated this revision to Diff 27131.Jan 9 2015, 12:24 AM

joshuaspence retitled this revision from to Add documentation for routing WebSockets through a reverse proxy.

joshuaspence updated this object.

joshuaspence edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)

joshuaspence added a reviewer: epriestley.

Herald added a reviewer: Blessed Reviewers. · View Herald TranscriptJan 9 2015, 12:24 AM

Herald added subscribers: epriestley, Korvin. · View Herald Transcript

epriestley accepted this revision.Jan 9 2015, 12:32 AM

epriestley edited edge metadata.

epriestley added inline comments.

src/docs/user/configuration/notifications.diviner
121	"this approaching" -> "this approach"
121	"is termination" -> "is terminated"
121–125	This argument isn't terribly compelling, since you're trading 2 config options for a page of them. Maybe emphasize that you don't have to duplicate configuration or similar. (This setup simply seems more complicated to me, though.) One-point-five things that might be worth mentioning: You don't have to open up a separate port. Same deal, but clients don't need to be able to connect to a weird port.
127	Maybe mention that these paths are examples or something -- we really should not have to do this, but users are crazily excited about taking everything literally.
145	One downside to this approach is that you'll send authentication cookies to the Node server. Although it seems unlikely that an attacker could gain any kind of access which would make this relevant, I figured I'd mention it.